Forum Home > GMAT > Quantitative > Problem Solving (PS)
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.
Some studies of how it was that Prussia resisted the wave of European
[#permalink]
Updated on: 12 Jun 2024, 01:42
Updated on: 12 Jun 2024, 01:42
2
Kudos
52
Bookmarks
Show timer
00:00
Difficulty:
95%
(hard)
Question Stats:
49% (02:34) correct
51%
(02:35)
wrong
based on 402
sessions
Some studies of how it was that Prussia resisted the wave of European democratization in the nineteenth century point to Prussia’s unequal distribution of land ownership as the principal explanation. And political figures from areas in Prussia with high inequality in land ownership tended to be the staunchest opponents of democratic reforms.
However, arguments that focus only on those figures’ conflicts with landless people ignore the fact that political figures are not only representatives of socioeconomic interests but also political actors embedded in particular contexts that shape whether they support democratic reforms. Historians must take such contexts into account if they hope to explain what transpired in Prussia during this period.
Select Passage for the statement that best describes the purpose of the passage as a whole, and select Portion in Boldface for the statement that best describes the purpose of the portion in boldface. Make only two selections, one in each column.
However, arguments that focus only on those figures’ conflicts with landless people ignore the fact that political figures are not only representatives of socioeconomic interests but also political actors embedded in particular contexts that shape whether they support democratic reforms. Historians must take such contexts into account if they hope to explain what transpired in Prussia during this period.
Select Passage for the statement that best describes the purpose of the passage as a whole, and select Portion in Boldface for the statement that best describes the purpose of the portion in boldface. Make only two selections, one in each column.
ID: 100373
| Passage |
Portion in Boldface |
|
| To offer an alternative to the standard explanation of a particular historical event. | ||
| To provide evidence that economic issues were at the root of a particular historical event. | ||
| To criticize a certain type of argument about a particular historical event. | ||
| To criticize the motives of political figures involved in a particular historical event. | ||
| To encourage historians not to approach a particular historical event from too narrow a perspective. |
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
Passage: To encourage historians not to approach a particular historical event from too narrow a perspective.
Portion in
Boldface: To criticize a certain type of argument about a particular historical event.
Boldface: To criticize a certain type of argument about a particular historical event.
Director
Joined: 20 Sep 2016
Posts: 556
Given Kudos: 632
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Operations
GPA: 3.6
WE:Operations (Consumer Products)
Re: Some studies of how it was that Prussia resisted the wave of European
[#permalink]
19 Dec 2018, 11:05
19 Dec 2018, 11:05
7
Kudos
1
Bookmarks
jack0997 wrote:
Can any expert help? I chose option A and E. The correct answers are EC. I think the boldface does not criticize, it rather encourages historians not to approach a particular historical event from too narrow a perspective.
jack0997 how are you...apologies from the club to get back to you so late...lemme try to presnet my reasoning :
arguent:
1) some studies....as principal explanation" - in this sentence the author states a FACT that some studies point towards an aspect to expalain a phenomenon..phenomen-resistance to demo ..aspect-land ownership...the author states that the studies think that land ownership is the pirmary explanation for prusia's resistsance...THIS IS A FACT
2)"political figure...reforms" - author cites another FACT that the political figures deom areas(areas that had highly unequal land ownership)tended to be opponents of demo - THIS IS FACT
so far so good...author firsd tells us that some studies think that resistyance could be explained by land owneership...this is supported by the fact political figure FROM AREAS WHICH HAD UNEQUAL LAND WONERSHIP ...
3)HOWEVER..refoems" - contrast... the moment i read "some studies" i knew that author is going to qualify the implications of the study... the author raises a consideration that other aspects such as context are also important and hence argunmets depending solely upon one aspect are limited...author is not in agreement with the narrow scope of the study. then he concludes that a historians mus also account for the context in whihc certain events take place...
now purpose- why is author writing this passage?? to presnet the results of the study??? nope...the intentio of the author is to raise a consideration which should be taken into consideration and concludes by recommedning the historians to look at other aspects too
why not C? the author does criticize an argument which solely bases its conclusion on narrow aspects but is that what his main intention is??? author first criticeses about tyhe narrow scope and then he SUGGESTS the historians to consider other aspects to...look athe conclusion ...that is what author is trying to say...the criticism is how he inititates his argument but the purpose is to suggest to be more appreciative of other aspects
BOLD FACE:
author in the bold face tells us that the arguments base their opinion on naroow aspect...now this is a limitation of the argument which the author opposes and hence option C is right..
why not A? first of all author never presents an alternative to a STANDARD EXPLANATION...he only states that the conclsuion of the agrument is based on narrow aspects ...but he never presents any LATERNATIVE to an explanataion...
Re: Some studies of how it was that Prussia resisted the wave of European
[#permalink]
22 Dec 2018, 08:12
22 Dec 2018, 08:12
2
Kudos
3
Bookmarks
The first thing to do is identify the various sections of the passage as argument vs facts, premise vs counter premise and the conclusion - primary strategy from CR bible
The two important parts of the passage that the question stem targets are these:
Counter-premise - “however, arguments that focus only” .... also happens to be the boldface section
Conclusion: Historians must take such contexts into account ...
So going back to the question stem:
The first question asks for the main point of the passage - so focus on the conclusion - It clearly states that historians should consider alternative views - Answer E
Boldface Argument Part - the bolded section only provides an opinion and there’s no fact, if anything this is more of an argument against hence a counter premise (idea counter to the argument) - Answer C
Posted from my mobile device
The two important parts of the passage that the question stem targets are these:
Counter-premise - “however, arguments that focus only” .... also happens to be the boldface section
Conclusion: Historians must take such contexts into account ...
So going back to the question stem:
The first question asks for the main point of the passage - so focus on the conclusion - It clearly states that historians should consider alternative views - Answer E
Boldface Argument Part - the bolded section only provides an opinion and there’s no fact, if anything this is more of an argument against hence a counter premise (idea counter to the argument) - Answer C
Posted from my mobile device
