warrior1991 wrote:
Took 13 mins and 37 seconds got 5/6 correct.
Dense passage but it is very good overall.
generis I marked C in question#3. However, the answer is option E.
Can you tell me the exact lines that paraphrase this answer choice.
warrior1991 , your accuracy is excellent!
I think people who rejected E did so
because the word "emotional" is not used in the passage (and it is in the question).
But "empathy, understanding, different perspectives, human nature, relationships," and
a few other words and phrases all suggest the "emotional needs."
As I said above, the connection between ethics and emotion is weird.
I highlighted the sentences in which the (weird) connection is most evident.
I will try to do what you ask. Passage is below and color coded.
Writing this out makes it look as if checking takes a long time.
It does not. Look for keywords and synonyms for keywords.
Abbreviated version =
Eliminate an answer if
one thing is wrong with it.
•
The abbreviated version:
A) no mention of "adequate emphasis" or anything like it
B) "more ethics," in context, is conceptually inane (and the piece is about more empathy IN ethics)
C) no mention of MORE direct training or something like it (to my surprise, no mention of direct training at all)
D) ONLY and PURELY? Hooey. Too strong. Last paragraph confirms: narrative should be
incorporated and is a
correctiveE) By POE, the answer.
In addition, I find "insufficient," [connected to scientific training] and "unprepared" [connected to philosophical ethics].
The piece is about lack of empathy. Empathy is about others' emotions. Fits exactly with the question.
•
The thorough version3. It can be inferred from the passage that the author would most likely agree with which one of the following statements?
(A) The heavy load of technical coursework in today’s medical schools often keeps them from giving adequate emphasis to courses in medical ethics.Keywords: technical coursework, adequate emphasis, ethics coursesHeavy load of
technical coursework =?
-- med students disconnected from the "personal" and ethical aspects
-- "technical" (scientific) part = insufficient skills to deal with "modern ethical dilemmas"
I recall no mention of
inadequate emphasis on medical ethics courses.
I will double check.
-- no, there is no mention of
(1) inadequate emphasis on ethics at all, let alone
(2)
caused by a heavy course load
(B) Students learn more about ethics through the use of fiction than through the use of non-fictional readings.keyword: use of fictionCareful. The author wants to teach more about empathy IN ethics.
Fiction = more
empathy, not "more ethics."
What is "more ethics," anyway? That concept is dumb.
Do they learn more rules? More branches of ethics?
Find "use of fiction" Result?
Use of fiction =
1) better prepared for ethical dilemmas. (TOO abstract. I doubled back. See underline).
Better prepared because
2) fiction = flexible thinking
3) fiction requires identification with characters = see from another perspective (part of empathy)
4) UNDERSTANDING human experience. Read: something that is like empathy.
Nonfiction? From (A) we know that the med students are disconnected and not prepared for human interaction.
Use of fiction = more EMPATHY. Not more ethics.
Discard B
(C) The traditional method of ethical training in medical schools should be supplemented or replaced by more direct practical experience with real-life patients in ethically difficult situations.keywords: "direct" • "practical experience" • "real-life"On third look, this is the
worst answer in terms of support from the passage.
• There is NO mention of training students by way of "direct practical experience with real-life patients in ethically difficult situations"
or something like that scene. Not one mention.
The mind wants to do something with references to the real world such as:
"multifarious ethical dilemmas they will face as physicians"
"
remaining empathetic to needs of patients"
The references do not matter. What matters?
The phrases "direct practical experience" and "real-life patients."
You won't find them or any synonyms in the context of training.
• there is NO mention of supplementation or replacement by 'MORE' direct practical experience.
This answer is the worst of the five. (Worry not: it's the trap. 30% chose it)
Eliminate C.
(D)
The failing of an abstract, philosophical training in ethics can be remedied only by replacing it with a
purely narrative-based approach.key words: harder to call. Just scan last paragraph quickly - make sure it says what I thought.
Yep. This sentence does not match the balanced tone esp. in last paragraph.
key words become:
incorporated and
corrective.I didn't have to check this one, though I did anyway because people trained at law schools become text-obsessed.
For good reason: we would rather not be impaled by professors and then judges, thanks.
No mention of other remedies, so no idea whether fiction is the only way. Too strong anyway.
Nor does author want "purely" narrative based approach.
Rather, fiction should be "incorporated" (mixed in); is a corrective (not a wholesale replacement).
Abstract philosophical training can be valuable.
Used
boldface type to indicate places in which this statement is contradicted.
Eliminate D.
(E) Neither scientific training nor traditional philosophical ethics adequately prepares doctors to deal with the emotional dimension of patients’ needs.
keywords: "scientific [or theoretical] training" and "traditional ethics" and "philosophical"
-- too much scientific training =
insufficient skills to deal with "modern" ethical problems
-- too much scientific training = students
disconnected from the human part of human beings
-- traditional philosophical ethics = some value, conceptual clarity, but "does
little to help understanding"
and
does not prepare students for "multifarious" situations.
Biggest problem: lack of empathy, which is what doctors need to respond to patients.
Students not adequately prepared to deal with the "emotional dimension of patients' needs."
Correct.
Hope that helps.
Let me know whether you still have questions.
**********
One of the greatest challenges facing medical students today, apart from absorbing volumes of technical information and learning habits of scientific thought, is that of
remaining empathetic to the needs of patients in the face of all this rigorous training. Requiring students to immerse themselves completely in
medical coursework risks disconnecting [disconnected] them
from the personal and ethical aspects of doctoring, and such
strictly scientific thinking is insufficient [insufficient skills] for grappling with
modern ethical dilemmas. For these reasons, aspiring physicians need to develop new ways of thinking about and interacting with patients. Training in ethics that takes narrative literature as its primary subject is one method of accomplishing this.
Although training in ethics is currently provided by medical schools, this training relies heavily on an abstract, philosophical view of ethics. Although the conceptual clarity provided by a traditional ethics course
can be valuable,
theorizing about ethics contributes
little to the understanding of everyday human experience or
to preparing medical students for the multifarious ethical dilemmas they will face as physicians.
A true foundation in ethics must be predicated on an understanding of human behavior that reflects a wide array of relationships and readily adapts to various perspectives, for this is what is required to develop empathy. Ethics courses drawing on
narrative literature can better help students prepare for ethical dilemmas precisely because such literature
attaches its readers so forcefully to the concrete and varied would of human events. [Hmm. Now I need to go back. I will underline and highlight what I missed on first re-scan.]
The act of reading
narrative literature is uniquely suited to the development of what might be called
flexible ethical thinking. To grasp the development of character, to tangle with heightening moral crises, and to engage oneself with the story not as one’s own but nevertheless as something recognizable and worthy of attention, readers must use their moral imagination. Giving oneself over to the ethical conflicts in a story requires the abandonment of strictly absolute, inviolate sets of moral principles. Reading literature also demands that the reader adopt another person’s point of view –that of the narrator or a character in a story—and thus requires the ability to depart from one’s personal ethical stance and examine moral issues from new perspectives.
It does not follow that readers, including medical professionals, must relinquish all moral principles, as is the case with situational ethics, in which decisions about ethical choices are made on the basis of intuition ad are entirely relative to the circumstances in which they arise. Such an extremely relativistic stance would have as little benefit for the patient or physician as would a dogmatically absolutist one. Fortunately, the
incorporation of narrative literature into the study of ethics, while serving as a
corrective to the later stance, need not lead to the former. But it can give us something that is
lacking in the traditional philosophical study of ethics—namely, a deeper understanding of human nature that can serve as a foundation for ethical reasoning and allow greater flexibility in the application of moral principles.
_________________
—The only thing more dangerous than ignorance is arrogance. ~Einstein—I stand with Ukraine.
Donate to Help Ukraine!