PrepTest 153
[lcid:3711] Prep Test 153 LSAT — Reading Comp — S4
Reading comp
Passage
Questions 22-27 . Social historians have noted that European social . and political thought of the nineteenth and early .
Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage SummaryTopic: Social Sciences
Paragraph 1
Despite working when they were proposed, "grand theories" can no longer be seen to accurately describe the world, and we need to move to a view that includes historical contingency, perspective, and a lack of inevitability.
Key Lines:
Lines 1-5 - Introduce the background view that the Author is going to pivot away from
Lines 18-20 - The pivot to show that this view is no longer viable
Lines 37-40 - Introduces the problem that the Author is ultimately trying to solve in coming up with a new approach
Lines 42-50 - An overview of the new approach advocated for by the Author
Meta-Structure:
Old theory/New Theory
Problem/Solution
This passage combines these two structures, to bring up an old theory that has problems ("grand theories"), and then to pose the problem that needs to be addressed in order to create a new approach to the study of history. The Author then concludes with a general description of this new approach.
Last Thoughts:
The passage relies heavily in the first two paragraphs on the examples of Marxism and Freudianism, so we should expect some questions on that. The second paragraph also includes two reasons for the old theories to have fallen out of favor (events that don't fit the theories; association with failed governments), so we should expect questions there, too.
The last paragraph is a bit complex and nuanced, so we should expect there to be questions that play into the difficulty in distinguishing exactly what the Author is saying there. Knowing that it's a solution to how to incorporate what was good about the old theory (provide some type of story/sense into history) without falling into its problems (fully determined history) should help for questions that ask about it.
Paragraph 1
- Paragraph note
- A history of the approach to social/political thought (19th and early 20th centuries)
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Social/political thought centered on "grand theories" that explained many events with general rules
- Examples - Marxism (economic) and Freudianism (psychological)
- Paragraph note
- The love of "grand theories" has waned in recent years for several reasons
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- They were influential enough to be seen as hard-and-fast rules
- These theories hurt by events that don't fit them, and being linked to failed or abusive governments
- They worked at the time, but they no longer work
- Paragraph note
- A pivot to why "grand theories" were popular and thoughts on how to address that need with a new approach described by the author
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- They were popular because they made people feel as if history/life made sense ("historical inevitability").
- We need something to address that need that doesn't have the problem of "grand theories"
- Solution - An approach that focuses on contingency, unique details, "constrains" rather than "necessitates," and allows all possibilities without saying history is fully determined
Despite working when they were proposed, "grand theories" can no longer be seen to accurately describe the world, and we need to move to a view that includes historical contingency, perspective, and a lack of inevitability.
Key Lines:
Lines 1-5 - Introduce the background view that the Author is going to pivot away from
Lines 18-20 - The pivot to show that this view is no longer viable
Lines 37-40 - Introduces the problem that the Author is ultimately trying to solve in coming up with a new approach
Lines 42-50 - An overview of the new approach advocated for by the Author
Meta-Structure:
Old theory/New Theory
Problem/Solution
This passage combines these two structures, to bring up an old theory that has problems ("grand theories"), and then to pose the problem that needs to be addressed in order to create a new approach to the study of history. The Author then concludes with a general description of this new approach.
Last Thoughts:
The passage relies heavily in the first two paragraphs on the examples of Marxism and Freudianism, so we should expect some questions on that. The second paragraph also includes two reasons for the old theories to have fallen out of favor (events that don't fit the theories; association with failed governments), so we should expect questions there, too.
The last paragraph is a bit complex and nuanced, so we should expect there to be questions that play into the difficulty in distinguishing exactly what the Author is saying there. Knowing that it's a solution to how to incorporate what was good about the old theory (provide some type of story/sense into history) without falling into its problems (fully determined history) should help for questions that ask about it.
Question prompt
The author introduces the
Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right
Credited answer: B
The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.
Question Type
Social Science
Answer choices
-
Asuggest why the wish Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice A is not credited
Incorrect. (Lines 53-56) The Author eventually says that the desire for history to read like a good story isn't a vain hope—it can be achieved without appealing to historical inevitability. -
Bexplain why the demise Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice B matches the stem
Correct. Question Type:
Argument Structure
Strategy Overview:
Head back to the line in question, check the role of that paragraph, and then read the line with the previous and following lines to get context
Answer Anticipation/Relevant Lines:
Line 39 is in the last paragraph, where the Author highlighted something appealing about the grand theories before pivoting to discussing a new approach that could incorporate that appeal.
Checking out line 39, that "cognitive satisfaction" applies to the belief in historical inevitability. That satisfaction reflects something that people are missing now that grand theories aren't believed in (the nostalgia), and something that a new approach should attempt to address. Let's find an answer reflecting this role.
Answer Explanation:
(Lines 30-35) The Author says that grand theories were attractive because they gave history a sense of logic, and that losing this has led to a desire for cognitive satisfaction. This was all to explain what one scholar called "a nostalgia for determinism," so this is the correct answer.
Key Takeaway:
In LR, all statements in a stimulus are best defined with respect to the main point of the argument. In RC, we have a similar trend, but there are two layers to it—the role of a statement should be defined both with respect to the point of the paragraph it's contained within, and the passage as a whole. -
Cshow that the notion Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice C is not credited
Incorrect. (Lines 39-40) The Author says that we still long for this cognitive satisfaction—it's the part of grand theories that people miss! -
Dquestion the applicability of Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice D is not credited
Incorrect. (Lines 53-56) Much like with answer (A), the Author looks to suggest a new approach that incorporates some of the narrative elements of the grand theories. -
Eargue that interest in Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice E is not credited
Incorrect. (Lines 35-36; Lines 39-40) The Author says that we've already discarded the grand theories, not that interest in them will decline. And she also states that we long for the satisfaction of universal determinants that make history fit into a narrative/story/make sense.
What this tests
Discussion
No threads yet—be the first to ask a question or share an approach.