It is easy to accept Freud as an applied scientist, and, indeed, he is

Question

It is easy to accept Freud as an applied scientist, and, indeed, he is widely regarded as the twentieth century’s master clinician. However, in viewing Marx as an applied social scientist the stance needed is that of a Machiavellian operationalism. The objective is neither to bury nor to praise him. The assumption is simply that he is better understood for being understood as an applied sociologist. This is in part the clear implication of Marx’s Theses on Feurbach, which culminate in the resounding 11th thesis: “The philosophers have only interpreted the world in different ways; the point, however, is to change it.” This would seem to be the tacit creed of applied scientists everywhere.

Marx was no Faustian, concerned solely with understanding society, but a Promethean who sought to understand it well enough to influence and to change it. He was centrally concerned with the social problems of a lay group, the proletariat, and there can be little doubt that his work is motivated by an effort to reduce their suffering, as he saw it. His diagnosis was that their increasing misery and alienation engendered endemic class struggle; his prognosis claimed that this would culminate in revolution; his therapeutic prescription was class consciousness and active struggle.

Here, as in assessing Durkheim or Freud, the issue is not whether this analysis is empirically correct or scientifically adequate. Furthermore, whether or not this formulation seems to eviscerate Marx’s revolutionary core, as critics on the left may charge, or whether the formulation provides Marx with a new veneer of academic respectability, as critics on the right may allege, is entirely irrelevant from the present standpoint. Insofar as Marx’s or any other social scientist’s work conforms to a generalized model of applied social science, insofar as it is professionally oriented to the values and social problems of laymen in his society, he may be treated as an applied social scientist.

Despite Durkeim’s intellectualistic proclivities and rationalistic pathos, he was too much the product of European turbulence to turn his back on the travail of his culture. “Why strive for knowledge of reality, if this knowledge cannot aid us in life,” he asked. “Social science,” he said, “can provide us with rules of action for the future.” Durkheim, like Marx, conceived of science as an agency of social action, and like him was professionally oriented to the values and problems of laymen in his society. Unless one sees that Durkheim was in some part an applied social scientist, it is impossible to understand why he concludes his monumental study of Suicide with a chapter on “Practical Consequences,” and why, in the  Division of Labor , he proposes a specific remedy.    1 
 1. Which of the following best describes the author’s conception of an applied social scientist?

(A) A professional who listens to people’s problems
(B) A professional who seeks social action and change
(C) A student of society
(D) A proponent of class struggle
(E) A philosopher who interprets the world in a unique way

2 
 2. According to the author, which of the following did Marx and Durkheim have in common?

(A) A belief in the importance of class struggle
(B) A desire to create a system of social organization
(C) An interest in penology
(D) Regard for the practical applications of science
(E) A sense of the political organization of society

3 
 3. It may be inferred from the passage that the applied social scientist might be interested in all of the following subjects except

(A) the theory of mechanics
(B) how to make workers more efficient
(C) rehabilitation of juvenile delinquents
(D) reduction of social tensions
(E) industrial safety

4 
 4. Which of the following best summarizes the author’s main point?

(A) Marx and Durkheim were similar in their ideas.
(B) Freud, Marx, and Durkheim were all social scientists.
(C) Philosophers, among others, who are regarded as theoreticians can also be regarded as empiricists.
(D) Marx and Durkheim were applied social scientists because they were concerned with the solution of social problems.
(E) Pure and applied sciences have fundamentally similar objectives.

RC Butler 2022  -  Practice Two RC Passages Everyday.   
Passage # 72 Date: 17-Feb-2022
 This question is a part of RC Butler 2022 .  Click here for Details

gloomybison · Answer

I am not sure about the first and fourth question TBH; 
First it implicitly describes that “The philosophers have only interpreted the world in different ways; the point, however, is to change it. This would seem to be the tacit creed of applied scientists everywhere." 
-The entire previous part gives you an impression that in order to be considered an applied social scientist you have to seek social action and change

However in the subsequent paragraph it says "Insofar as Marx’s or any other social scientist’s work conforms to a generalized model of applied social science, insofar as it is professionally oriented to the values and social problems of laymen in his society, he may be treated as an applied social scientist." 
-From this very long sentence ı infer that as long as someone is oriented towards values and social problems within the frame of a generalized model of applied social science he/she may be considered as an applied social scientist. But NOTE THAT being oriented towards problem doesn't necessarily means that you seek social change. It merely implies that he/she just listens to the problems and states them

roh1714 · Answer

1. Which of the following best describes the author’s conception of an applied social scientist?

(A) A professional who listens to people’s problems- no mention
(B) A professional who seeks social action and change- correct, is mentioned quite a few times in the passage.
(C) A student of society- nonsense 
(D) A proponent of class struggle- wrong 
hint: "his therapeutic prescription was class consciousness and active struggle."
(E) A philosopher who interprets the world in a unique way- no mention

2. According to the author, which of the following did Marx and Durkheim have in common?
hint- Durkheim, like Marx, conceived of science as an agency of social action, and like him was professionally oriented to the values and problems of laymen in his society

(A) A belief in the importance of class struggle- no mention
(B) A desire to create a system of social organization- no mention
(C) An interest in penology- nonsense
(D) Regard for the practical applications of science- correct, similar to the hint
(E) A sense of the political organization of society- "political organization" ??

3. It may be inferred from the passage that the applied social scientist might be interested in all of the following subjects except
hint a- Durkheim, like Marx, conceived of science as an agency of social action, and like him was professionally oriented to the values and problems of laymen in his society
hint b- Durkheim was in some part an applied social scientist, it is impossible to understand why he concludes his monumental study of Suicide with a chapter on “Practical Consequences,” and why, in the Division of Labor, he proposes a specific remedy.

(A) the theory of mechanics- correct, no support from the passage
(B) how to make workers more efficient
(C) rehabilitation of juvenile delinquents
(D) reduction of social tensions
(E) industrial safety

4. Which of the following best summarizes the author’s main point?

(A) Marx and Durkheim were similar in their ideas- only part of the passage
(B) Freud, Marx, and Durkheim were all social scientists- not the main point
(C) Philosophers, among others, who are regarded as theoreticians can also be regarded as empiricists- nonsense
(D) Marx and Durkheim were applied social scientists because they were concerned with the solution of social problems- correct
(E) Pure and applied sciences have fundamentally similar objectives- nonsense

It is easy to accept Freud as an applied scientist, and, indeed, he is

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Reading Comprehension (RC) Questions

It is easy to accept Freud as an applied scientist, and, indeed, he is

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards