|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
21 Dec 2022, 01:16
Kudos
Bookmarks
Official Explanation
The primary purpose of the passage is to:
Difficulty Level: 700
Explanation
Inference
This question asks about how to undermine the way in which Gallagher connects Royalism and feminism. According to Gallagher, Cavendish’s work exemplifies the connection between these ideas, because Cavendish took the idea of absolute monarchy and extended that to the idea of absolute self, an idea that
should, Cavendish believed, apply to women as well as men.
A. Gallagher’s explanation of the link between Royalism and feminism does not depend on the education level of Royalist women relative to Parliamentarian women.
B. Filmer most likely would have been critical of Cavendish’s ideas, had he encountered them, but the passage does not indicate that Gallagher’s argument had anything to do with whether Filmer read Cavendish’s writings.
C. Correct. Gallagher uses Cavendish’s work to explain how Royalism gave rise to feminism, but if Cavendish’s views were completely atypical of other Royalist women, then those views cannot explain the link as Gallagher suggests they do.
D. The passage states in the first paragraph that if the Royalists and Parliamentarians were in agreement on issues of family organization and women’s political rights, then feminists should have been divided between the two sides—but they were not. So this idea, if true, would undermine that statement, but not Gallagher’s argument about the link between Royalists and feminists.
E. If more Royalists were opposed to Filmer’s radical patriarchalism, then Cavendish’s writings would seem to be more representative of tendencies in Royalist ideology, thus making Gallagher’s case stronger, not weaker.
The correct answer is C.
Difficulty Level: 700
Explanation
Inference
This question asks about how to undermine the way in which Gallagher connects Royalism and feminism. According to Gallagher, Cavendish’s work exemplifies the connection between these ideas, because Cavendish took the idea of absolute monarchy and extended that to the idea of absolute self, an idea that
should, Cavendish believed, apply to women as well as men.
A. Gallagher’s explanation of the link between Royalism and feminism does not depend on the education level of Royalist women relative to Parliamentarian women.
B. Filmer most likely would have been critical of Cavendish’s ideas, had he encountered them, but the passage does not indicate that Gallagher’s argument had anything to do with whether Filmer read Cavendish’s writings.
C. Correct. Gallagher uses Cavendish’s work to explain how Royalism gave rise to feminism, but if Cavendish’s views were completely atypical of other Royalist women, then those views cannot explain the link as Gallagher suggests they do.
D. The passage states in the first paragraph that if the Royalists and Parliamentarians were in agreement on issues of family organization and women’s political rights, then feminists should have been divided between the two sides—but they were not. So this idea, if true, would undermine that statement, but not Gallagher’s argument about the link between Royalists and feminists.
E. If more Royalists were opposed to Filmer’s radical patriarchalism, then Cavendish’s writings would seem to be more representative of tendencies in Royalist ideology, thus making Gallagher’s case stronger, not weaker.
The correct answer is C.
thelastskybender
Joined: 26 Dec 2022
Last visit: 10 Feb 2026
Posts: 128
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 50
Location: India
Schools: IIMA '25 (II) INSEAD Aug'24 intake
GMAT 1: 710 Q50 V36
24 Jun 2023, 03:34
Kudos
Bookmarks
GMATNinja KarishmaB Can you please help me with Q. 101. " which of the following,if true, would most clearly undermine Gallagher`s explanation of the link between Royalism and feminism?"
At the starting of the passage this is mentioned "Catherine Gallagher argues that Royalism engendered feminism because the ideology of absolute monarchy provided a transition to an ideology of the absolute self"
I felt like cause-effect phenomenon was in play here.
Cause: The ideology of absolute monarchy providing a transition to an ideology of the absolute self
Effect: Royalism engendered feminism
If we give the effect any alternative cause, conclusion will get weakened. And A does that by stating "Royalist women were generally better educated than were their Parliamentarian counterparts." [Giving Education as another cause to get the effect of feminism]
At the starting of the passage this is mentioned "Catherine Gallagher argues that Royalism engendered feminism because the ideology of absolute monarchy provided a transition to an ideology of the absolute self"
I felt like cause-effect phenomenon was in play here.
Cause: The ideology of absolute monarchy providing a transition to an ideology of the absolute self
Effect: Royalism engendered feminism
If we give the effect any alternative cause, conclusion will get weakened. And A does that by stating "Royalist women were generally better educated than were their Parliamentarian counterparts." [Giving Education as another cause to get the effect of feminism]
24 Jun 2023, 06:39
Kudos
Bookmarks
thelastskybender
It comes down to the available options. (C) is better than (A) and I will tell you why.
G says that Royalism engendered feminism because the ideology of absolute monarchy provided a transition to an ideology of the absolute self. She proceeded by giving an example of Cavendish. Cavendish was ambitious but knew that as a woman she was excluded from the pursuit of power in the real world (idea of absolute centerstage for the head), so she resolved to be mistress of her own world (absolute self, centre of her own being).
What will undermine this? If we can say that this is not the link. We can do that by undermining the example she gave. That other Royal women did not think the way Cavendish did. Then we undermine G's theory and that is what option (C) does.
Note that it is not said in the passage that G said that this is the ONLY reason why early feminists were Royalists . So giving an alternative isn't the best strategy. The education of Royal women could be an additional reason.
Recall that A caused B does not necessarily mean that C did not cause B until and unless the words imply it. But still, it comes down to the available options.
