PrepTest 115
Passage
Passage walkthrough
Topic: Social Science
Paragraph 1
- Paragraph note
- Author's conclusion (Haraway's primatology book most ambitious feminist science history book)
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Comparisons, according to the author:
- Haraway's book is a more ambitious feminist science history than any other book to date (first sentence)
- Primates seem like us, so Haraway can use them to make conscious and unconscious projections of her beliefs about nature and culture (last sentence)
- Author's attitude: "the most ambitious" (first sentence), "not only" (first sentence), "particularly apt vehicle" (last sentence), "they provide ready material" (last sentence)
- Comparisons, according to the author:
Paragraph 2
- Paragraph note
- Author's support (Haraway argues the division between knower/object is masculine and colonial)
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Comparison, according to the author:
- A distinction is drawn between the "traditional" division in scientific inquiry (between knower —scientist/historian — and object — nature/history) and Haraway's approach (miscellaneous human actors & creatures contribute to the knowledge of nature, which isn't singular) (first, fourth, and last sentences)
- Author's attitude: "most radical departure" (first sentence)
- Comparison, according to the author:
Paragraph 3
- Paragraph note
- Author's support (Haraway's fragmented, unique writing style reflects her views)
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Comparison, according to the author:
- A distinction is drawn between "traditional history" writing and Haraway's fragmented approach (third sentence)
- Author's attitude: "iconoclastic" (first sentence), "unorthodox" (first sentence), "will not succumb" (second sentence), "fragmented" (third sentence), "familiar enough" (third sentence), "rarely been but into practice" (third sentence), "complex alternative" (last sentence)
- Comparison, according to the author:
Paragraph 4
- Paragraph note
- Author's support (Haraway ignores distinction between scientific theory/practice and social issues/beliefs)
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Comparison, according to the author:
- A distinction is drawn between "internal" scientific issues and "external" scientific issues (second sentence)
- Author's attitude: "equally innovative" (first sentence), "difficult to set aside" (second sentence), "simply ignores it" (third sentence), "one must shed a great many assumptions" (last sentence)
- Comparison, according to the author:
Main Point: By challenging traditional assumptions of science and adopting a unique writing style, Donna Haraway's Primate Vision is an innovative work of primatology and the most ambitious book on the history of science written from a feminist perspective.
Meta-Structure?Innovative Subject: This passage adopts the Innovative [Subject] Meta-Structure.* This structure is usually reserved for passages about artists but can occasionally appear in passages about scientists, historians, philosophers, and others. In this case, we could call this an "Innovative Scientist" passage, as it's about a primatologist with some ambitious, unconventional ideas.
When a passage falls into the Innovative [Subject] Meta-Structure, the main point focuses on that innovation, as reflected in our main point above. Further, it's important to track whether and the extent to which the author approves of these innovations. In this passage, the author adopts a tone that suggests that the author truly admires Haraway's innovations, referring to her book as "the most ambitious book on the history of science yet written from a feminist perspective" (P1, S1), her writing style as a "complex alternative" to the traditional (P3, S4), and her analysis as "innovative" (P4, S1). The author does use some words that can have a neutral or even negative connotation, like "iconoclastic" (P3, S1) and "unorthodox" (P3, S1), and does make a concession that Haraway's writings could be considered by the more traditionally minded to be "distracting … bewildering … digressive" (P4, S4). However, on balance, the author seems to approve of Haraway's work.
*As is often the case with Innovative Subject passages, you could also reasonably call this passage an Old Approach/New Approach passage, characterizing Haraway's approach as the "new approach."
Comparison: The most prominent minor Meta-Structure is the comparison. As is often the case for passages that utilize the Innovative [Subject] Meta-Structure, the subject's innovations are frequently distinguished from the conventional approaches. The author distinguishes Haraway's approach from the traditional division between "active knower" and "passive object" in the second paragraph, distinguishes Haraway's writing style from the traditional style in the third paragraph, and distinguishes Haraway's topics from the traditional focus of scientific studies in the last paragraph. We should expect several questions about these.
Last Thoughts?The author uses many words and phrases that convey authorial opinions, so expect several questions about the author's attitude.Question prompt
Why the credited answer is right
Credited answer: C
The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.
Strategy Overview
Answer Anticipation
Answer choices
-
Aunderscore the importance of Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice A is not credited
(A) Does this answer choice say the author mentioned "rhetoric" to show how innovative Haraway really is, as she accomplished something in Primate Visions that historians of science talked about but had trouble actually accomplishing?
Nope. We can eliminate (A) once we see that it doesn't match our anticipation.
Besides, a quick glance at your notes should reveal that this paragraph had very little to do with arguing for "clear and effective writing." In fact, clear writing doesn't seem to be a goal of Haraway's, and it doesn't seem to be something that the author particularly values or would want to point out. After all, in a paragraph that genuinely praises Haraway, the author still notes that some readers would likely find Haraway's work "distracting … bewildering … digressive" (P4, S4).
-
Bhighlight the need for Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice B is not credited
(B) Does this answer choice say the author mentioned "rhetoric" to show how innovative Haraway really is, as she accomplished something in Primate Visions that historians of science talked about but had trouble actually accomplishing?
Nope. We can eliminate (B) once we see that it doesn't match our anticipation.
Besides, a quick glance at your notes should reveal that this paragraph had very little to do with "modes of language." In fact, the author never discusses that idea once in the entire passage, much less in this paragraph.
-
Cemphasize the fact that Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice C matches the stem
(C) Does this answer choice say the author mentioned "rhetoric" to show how innovative Haraway really is, as she accomplished something in Primate Visions that historians of science talked about but had trouble actually accomplishing?
Yep. This answer choice nails the purpose. The author used the term "rhetoric" to emphasize that although other historians talked the talk when it came to unifying the discussion of "internal" and "external" issues in science, our Innovative Subject was the one who could actually walk the walk. The fact that the historians couldn't actually unify the two issues is further emphasized when the author says that the dichotomy between the two issues is "difficult to set aside" (P4, S2). This all serves the general purpose of the fourth paragraph, which was to emphasize Haraway's innovative approach. Therefore, we can select (C) and advance to the following question.
-
Dcriticize the excessive concern Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice D is not credited
(D) Does this answer choice say the author mentioned "rhetoric" to show how innovative Haraway really is, as she accomplished something in Primate Visions that historians of science talked about but had trouble actually accomplishing?
Nope. We can eliminate (D) once we see that it doesn't match our anticipation.
Besides, a quick glance at your notes should reveal that this paragraph was not concerned with "criticizing form over content" in writings on the history of science. In fact, the preceding paragraph spent a long time praising Haraway's formal innovations.
-
Echaracterize the writing style Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice E is not credited
(E) Does this answer choice say the author mentioned "rhetoric" to show how innovative Haraway really is, as she accomplished something in Primate Visions that historians of science talked about but had trouble actually accomplishing?
Nope. We can eliminate (E) once we see that it doesn't match our anticipation.
Besides, a reference to "rhetoric" in the fourth paragraph will reveal that the "rhetoric" is not referring to Haraway's but to other, less innovative historians of science. So, "rhetoric" does not directly characterize Haraway's writing style or analytical approach.