The recognition of exclusive chattels and estate has really harmed and

Question

Aristotle RC 99 - Passage 90    
 
   The recognition of exclusive chattels and estate has really harmed and obscured Individualism. It has led Individualism entirely astray. It has made gain, not growth, its aim, so that man has thought that the important thing is to have, and has not come to know that the important thing is to be. The true perfection of man lies, not in what man has, but in what man is.

This state has crushed true Individualism, and set up an Individualism that is false. It has debarred one part of the community from being individual by starving them. It has debarred the other part of the community from being individual by putting them on the wrong road and encumbering them. Indeed, so completely has man's personality been absorbed by his trinkets and entanglements that the law has always treated offenses against a man‘s property with far more severity than offenses against his person.

It is clear that no authoritarian socialism will do. For while under the present system a very large number of people can lead lives of a certain amount of freedom and expression and happiness, under an industrial barrack system, or a system of economic tyranny, nobody would be able to have any such freedom at all. It is to be regretted that a portion of our community should be practically in slavery, but to propose to solve the problem by enslaving the entire community is childish. Every man must be left quite free to choose his own work.

No form of compulsion must be exercised over him. If there is, his work will not be good for him, will not be good in itself, and will not be good for others. I hardly think that any socialist, nowadays, would seriously propose that an inspector should call every morning at each house to see that each citizen rose up and did manual labour for eight hours. Humanity has got beyond that stage, and reserves such a form of life for the people whom, in a very arbitrary manner, it chooses to call criminals.

Many of the socialistic views that I have come across seem to me to be tainted with ideas of authority, if not of actual compulsion. Of course, authority and compulsion are out of the question. All association must be quite voluntary. It is only in voluntary associations that man is fine. It may be asked how Individualism, which is now more or less dependent on the existence of private property for its development, will benefit by the abolition of such private property. The answer is very simple. It is true that, under existing conditions, a few men who have had private means of their own, such as Byron, Shelley, Browning, Victor Hugo, Baudelaire, and others, have been able to realize their personality, more or less completely.

Not one of these men ever did a single day‘s work for hire. They were relieved from poverty. They had an immense advantage. The question is whether it would be for the good of Individualism that such an advantage be taken away. Let us suppose that it is taken away. What happens then to Individualism? How will it benefit? Under the new conditions Individualism will be far freer, far finer, and far more intensified than it is now. I am not talking of the great imaginatively realized Individualism of such poets as I have mentioned, but of the great actual Individualism latent and potential in mankind generally.   1 
 D 
 1. The author of the passage most likely mentions Byron, Shelly, Browning, Hugo, and Baudelaire in an effort to:

A. give examples of the harmful effect of money on Individualism and art.
B. call attention to the rarity of artistic genius.
C. define what is meant by the phrase ―realize their personality.
D. stress the importance of financial independence
E. add credibility to his claims

2 
 B 
 2. Which of the following would the author be most likely to consider an example of ―enslaving the entire community?

I.  South Africa under apartheid, where rights of citizenship were denied to the Black majority, and granted in full only to the White minority
 II.  Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge, where the urban population was forcibly deported to the countryside to perform agricultural labour
 III.  Sweden under the Social Democrats, where all citizens pay high taxes to support extensive social programs

A. I only
B. II only
C. I and II
D. II and III
E. I, II and III

3 
 D 
 3. Suppose for a moment that Baudelaire was actually not wealthy, and often had to work to earn money. What relevance would this information have to the arguments posed by the author within the passage?

A. It would refute the author‘s claim that artists require independent wealth to create.
B. It would refute the author‘s claim that poets are people who can realize their own personality.
C. It would strengthen the author‘s claim that the acquisition of wealth leads Individualism astray.
D. The central thesis of the passage would remain equally valid.
E. It would strongly weaken the main argument made by the author in the passage

Prateeksansanwal · Answer

Well i wonder why the answer of question 1 isn't C because in the last paragraph it says that if the money is taken away from these people they will be known more for their potential and hence the individualism will be more finer.

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Passage Map

Topic and Scope:

Argues for the abolishing private property in order to foster individualism.

Mapping the Passage

Para 1 and 2  explain how private property has harmed individualism.
 Para 3 and 4  argues that socialism cannot be compulsory.
 Para 5  argues that while most socialists don‘t advocate compulsory socialism, authority is still overemphasized.
 Para 5 and 6  tie individualism and private property together, and gives examples of people who were able to achieve individualism through wealth and  Para 6  argues that individualism will benefit from the elimination of personal property.

Official Explanation

1. The author of the passage most likely mentions Byron, Shelly, Browning, Hugo, and Baudelaire in an effort to:

Difficulty Level:   700

Explanation

Where are these individuals mentioned? Look over your map of  Para 5 . These were all individuals who were able to maximize their individuality because they were so rich that they didn‘t have to work. Only  (A) and (D)  involve money, and  (D)  alone fits with the author‘s overall point in the paragraph.

(A): Opposite.  While this choice does talk about money, and while the author‘s overall point is that property should be abolished, in this paragraph the author is giving examples of artists who had an ―immense advantage‖ by being rich. Money therefore must be helpful to individualism.

(B): Out of Scope . While the author might believe that genius is rare, the scope of the paragraph is on money and its advantages to individualism.

(C): Distortion.  The author does define this; it‘s simply individualism. The focus of the paragraph is on money, however.

(D): The correct answer

(E):  Incorrect, as explained above.

Hope it helps

VRG1998 · Answer

Can anyone explain Q2. I did not understand what the author meant by slavery. Apartheid is a case where the entire community is enslaved.

azhrhasan · Answer

SajjadAhmad Please post OA for all questions. The passage literally bounced beyond my head. All 3 wrong.

ashokk · Answer

Can someone explain Q2 and Q3?

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Hello  azhrhasan  For passage map and question #1  Click here

VRG1998   ashokk  here are question #2 and 3

Official Explanation

2. Which of the following would the author be most likely to consider an example of ―enslaving the entire community?

Difficulty Level:   700

Explanation

Where does the author use the phrase mentioned in the question? It‘s mentioned in  Para 4 , where the author is arguing against compulsory socialism. Look for choices that exemplify compulsory socialism. Start with RN II, which appears in three choices: In this example, part of the population is forced to perform a certain type of labor, which certainly would qualify as compulsory socialism. Look at RN I: No socialism is suggested in this example, only segregation. RN III represents socialism, but there‘s no suggestion that it‘s compulsory socialism.  (B) must be correct.

(A): Opposite.  As described above.

(B): The correct answer

(C):  Opposite. As above.

(D):  Opposite. As above.

(E):  Opposite. As above.

3. Suppose for a moment that Baudelaire was actually not wealthy, and often had to work to earn money. What relevance would this information have to the arguments posed by the author within the passage?

Difficulty Level:   700

What is Baudelaire used as an example of? Someone who was able to cultivate his genius because he didn‘t have to hold down a day job. If Baudelaire did have to work, this would weaken the author‘s idea of wealth as an advantage to attaining individuality. However, since he‘s one of six examples, it wouldn‘t weaken it all that much; the author would have plenty to fall back on. The only ―weakeners‖ in the choices are outright refutations, which is far too strong an effect on the argument. It‘s clear that this information contradicting the author wouldn‘t strengthen the argument, though, so only  (D)  is left: The author‘s main points might not have as much evidence as they did, but there‘s still plenty for them to remain valid.

(A): Distortion . As described above, it would only ever-so-slightly weaken it.

(B): Out of Scope . Even if Baudelaire did have to work, he could still be a poet who recognized his own personality.

(C): Opposite.  Baudelaire doesn‘t tie into this part of the argument, but if he was individualist and did have to work for private property, the author‘s argument would be weakened.

(D): The correct answer

(E): Incorrect , as described above.

Hope it helps

TANYA27 · Answer

got all answers correct in 12 mins

sakshimystic · Answer

Can you explain why E is incorrect?
Is is not supporting what author has said before and after giving the examples of these men?
Looking at the bigger picture i thought that could be the answer.
i want a reason to eliminate it.

Sajjad1994 · Answer

The main point to focus on here is to know the direction or intention of the author. To know with what intention the author provided these examples. It may be correct that the credibility of the author's claims increases with the examples but was that the author's primary intention or not is necessary to know. The author's primary intention was not to add credibility to his claims rather stress the importance of financial independence and what concudes this is the while body of the passage or the purpose of the passage.

ChakradharKale · Answer

Hey there,

C is not the answer simply because C is a very narrow choice. It helps you only with that particular sentence and not with the broader theme of the passage. If you track the passage back from the very words - realise their full ... - you will notice that it's about financial independence all in all and not about only "realising personality" which is part of the benefits one reaps from individualism and financial independence.

Hope this helps.

Regards,
Chucks.

The recognition of exclusive chattels and estate has really harmed and

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

The recognition of exclusive chattels and estate has really harmed and

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