A majority taken collectively may be regarded as a being whose opinion

Question

A majority taken collectively may be regarded as a being whose opinions and, most frequently, whose interests are opposed to those of another being, which is styled a minority. If it is admitted that a man possessing absolute power may misuse that power by wronging his adversaries, why should a majority not be liable to the same reproach?  Men are not apt to change their characters by agglomeration; nor does their patience in the presence of obstacles increase with the consciousness of their strength.  For these reasons we should not willingly invest any group of our fellows with that unlimited authority which we should refuse to any individual.

One social power must always predominate over others, but liberty is endangered when this power is checked by no obstacles which may retard its course and force it to moderate its own vehemence. Unlimited power is in itself a bad and dangerous thing, and no power on earth is so worthy of honor for itself or of reverential obedience to the rights which it represents that we should admit its uncontrolled and all-predominant authority. When the right and means of absolute command are conferred on a people or a king, on an aristocracy or a democracy, a monarchy or a republic, there has been implanted the germ of tyranny.

The main evil of the present democratic institutions of the United States does not arise, as is often asserted in Europe, from their weakness, but from their overpowering strength; the excessive liberty which reigns in that country is not so alarming as is the very inadequate security which exists against tyranny.

When an individual or a party is wronged in the United States, to whom can he apply for redress? If to the public opinion, public opinion constitutes the majority; if to the legislature, it represents the majority and implicitly obeys its injunctions; if to the executive power, it is appointed by the majority and remains a passive tool in its hands; the public troops consist of the majority under arms; the jury is the majority invested with the right of hearing judicial cases, and in certain states even the judges are elected by the majority. However iniquitous or absurd the evil complained about, no sure barrier is established to defend against it.   1 
 1. Which of the following would be the most appropriate title for the passage?

(A) The Tyranny of the Majority
(B) Democracy: Triumph of the People
(C) Abuses of Power
(D) The Failure of Democracy in the United States
(E) Minority Rights

2 
 2. Which of the following best paraphrases the author’s statement in the highlighted text ?

(A) Individuals do not change their behavior when they act in concert with others who are likeminded, and, knowing they are acting as part of the group, they are not likely to show greater restraint when opposed than they would if they were acting individually.
(B) Groups are not different from one another, they all show strong impatience when thwarted.
(C) The character of men is formed by the accumulation of their traits, and patience is not a common trait among men of strength.
(D) The leopard does not change its spots no matter how long it lives, and it is, and remains, patient in the presence of obstacles.
(E) Men change their behavior when they act in groups; they are more patient when they are in the company of their fellows than they are when they are alone.

3 
 3. With which of the following statements would the author of the passage be most likely to agree?

(A) Democracy is no greater defense against tyranny than is monarchy or aristocracy.
(B) Minority rule would probably be more responsive to the needs of all people than majority rule.
(C) No government should be trusted since all governments are equally tyrannical.
(D) Since one social power must always predominate over others, it is futile to provide checks and balances in government.
(E) To render itself immune to the germ of tyranny, the United States should strengthen its political institutions.

4 
 4. Which of the following, assuming that each is true, would most weaken the point that the author is making in the last two paragraphs of the passage?

(A) The framers of the U.S. Constitution deliberately separated the three branches of the government to prevent tyranny.
(B) There is not a single majority in the United States; there are many majorities, each composed of a different collection of individuals and each acting as a restraint on the others.
(C) The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution specifically guarantees the right of each citizen to petition the government for redress of grievances.
(D) Even though the United States is not a direct democracy, all U.S. citizens have an equal opportunity to participate in political life and to hold public office.
(E) The framers of the U.S. Constitution had two primary concerns: to prevent the government from exercising tyranny over the people and to prevent the majority from exercising tyranny over the minority.

5 
 5. The author’s treatment of the topic of the passage can best be described as

(A) ironic
(B) neutral
(C) logical
(D) irreverent
(E) diffident

6 
 6. In the passage, the author is primarily concerned with

(A) challenging a commonly held belief
(B) contrasting two opposing views
(C) advocating a course of action
(D) reconciling an apparent conflict
(E) proposing a solution to an unrecognized problem

AndrewN · Accepted Answer

Yes,  mSRK ,  the author's treatment of the topic  is synonymous with  tone . Even though I would not expect to see such a question on the GMAT™, on tests in which vocabulary may be tested in the above manner, I tell my students to work with the words they  do  know first. The first three answer choices will pose less of a problem for most test-takers. Even though  ironic  is often misused (when  coincidental  would be more fitting), people generally understand that irony has to do with a reversal of expectations. The passage is not even remotely ironic. The author makes a straightforward argument that is present, front and center, by the end of the paragraph one, and the rest of the passage builds from that topic statement. Hence, (A) looks like a poor choice.

It should be clear that the passage is not neutral in tone. Look at the persuasive or judgmental language throughout:

Paragraph 1— we should not willingly invest 
Paragraph 2— one social power must always predominate 
Paragraph 3— the main evil... very inadequate security 
Paragraph 4— absurd... no sure barrier

This author aims to convince the reader of the argument made in the first paragraph, that no group should have unlimited authority. Get rid of (B).

Is the passage logical? Does the author present a logical argument? Sure. The rhetorical question in the second line of the passage stands as a pillar upon which the argument is based. The question at the beginning of the final paragraph has a similar effect. The reader is meant to understand by that point that the system is flawed, and the conditional statements that follow should come as no surprise. Why? Because the argument has followed a logical trajectory throughout. I have no problem with this answer choice. (I chose it in about half a minute.)

As for (D) and (E), these are the sorts of "twenty-dollar words," as we sometimes call them in the States, that intimidate test-takers, many of whom will choose one or the other based on the logic that a vocabulary test needs to test knowledge of such words. I did consider  irreverent  for a moment, thinking that the author is clearly no fan of the  present democratic institutions of the United States  (paragraph three), but I do not like to rely on interpretation if another answer is more present on the screen, more justifiable. To be honest, I had forgotten the exact meaning of  diffident , but since I already felt comfortable with (C), I chose it. Had I not felt that (C) was rooted in the passage, I would have gone for (E), feeling as though I had compelling reasons to eliminate each of the other answers.

I did not expect to write so much on a vocabulary-based question I do not even think would appear on the GMAT™, but the above does reflect my thought process in arriving at the correct answer. I hope it may be of help to you.

- Andrew

IanStewart · Answer

Long stretches of the passage are nearly incomprehensible, and I'd be absolutely shocked if it were true that this is genuinely a retired official question. I do have one early edition of the OG, and this question certainly is not in it. It seems a lot of these 1000 Series questions are tagged as "old Official Guide" questions on this forum, perhaps because of a misconception that those documents only contain older official questions. Unless someone has actually seen them in print in an OG, they should just be labeled '1000 Series', so forum members will know that the source is uncertain, and may be low quality or high quality.

So I wouldn't worry about the question much - it doesn't resemble anything I could ever imagine seeing on the modern GMAT. For Q6, if you understand the 'primary concern' of the passage to be something like 'even democracy contains the seeds of tyranny', then perhaps that does 'challenge a commonly held belief', but there's no evidence in the passage that that is true. We really need to bring outside opinions about what beliefs people commonly hold about democracy to justify the OA here. If this were a real GMAT question, and if this was the right answer, I'd always expect to find, within the passage, some indication about what beliefs are commonly held. So I'd expect the passage to say something like "Despite what many people believe, democracy is no panacea", or "Many scholars argue that X is true... but..." We don't have that here. The most we really have is the comment about what "is often asserted in Europe" in the third paragraph, but that doesn't address what I'd consider the 'primary concern' of the passage.

So I don't think much of the OA here. But I also don't think the passage really 'advocates a course of action' either. It says we should  not  do something (though whether the thing we shouldn't do could be called a 'course of action' is something I'd dispute). It doesn't say anywhere what we  should  do, so it's not advocating a particular course of action anywhere to my reading.
 
But as I said earlier, it's not a question deserving of much attention.

mSKR · Answer

Sajjad1994  : Please post official explanation for Q5.

The author's treatment means author tone? 
In the whole passage, author is very logical deriving thoughts based on some logic, so C should be an answer?
In the whole passage, I also felt is not it irony that one side getting majority is a big think but at the same time , it gets defeated with small tyranny/small weakness? 
I also felt it could be diffident, as author presents his views without attack on anyone or aggressive against.

I choose finally A as the answer.

AndrewN  : Please share your approach to solve this question. What if we don't know meaning of some words exactly as I guessed meaning and with POE , I selected A and was found wrong.

Thanks!

Michele4 · Answer

GMATNinja   IanStewart  For Q6 doesn't the passage advocate a course of action? It even says "For these reasons we should not willingly invest any group of our fellows with that unlimited authority which we should refuse to any individual" 
Moreover I found it hard to justify "commonly held belief" in the OA. Do you have any advice?

Quantum2022 · Answer

Spent about 2 mins reading the passage.
Para 1: Majority rule not the best thing out there. Shouldn't give groups power that we wouldn't give to individuals.
Para 2: Unlimited power= bad and absolute command in democracy, monarchy, etc has tyranny in it
Para 3: main problem in American democracy is lack of security against tyranny
Para 4: Examples of this lack of security

On to the questions...

1. Which of the following would be the most appropriate title for the passage? 
(A) Tyranny of the Majority
All the others are too limiting to either democracy or US democracy.

2. Which of the following best paraphrases the author’s statement in the highlighted text ? 
(A) Individuals do not change their behavior when they act in concert with others who are likeminded, and, knowing they are acting as part of the group, they are not likely to show greater restraint when opposed than they would if they were acting individually.

I looked at the sentence following the highlighted sentence to infer the meaning of this passage and a bit of process of elimination. The highlighted section also says "...nor does their patience increase..." and this is the only option that says that "they are not likely to show greater restraint..."

3. With which of the following statements would the author of the passage be most likely to agree? 
(A) Democracy is no greater defense against tyranny than is monarchy or aristocracy.
B- author does not say that minority is better. Out
C- author says nothing about not trusting ANY government. Out
D- author doesn't say that it's futile to provide checks and balances in government. In fact you could say he/she want their to be an opposing force to balance this "unchecked power of the majority".
E- doesn't say what the US gov't should do

4. Which of the following, assuming that each is true, would most weaken the point that the author is making in the last two paragraphs of the passage? 
The last 2 paragraphs say that the US govt doesn't protect people against tyrannical rule and provides some examples of how the majority drives the response in all levels of the government and judiciary.

The only option that would weaken this point is B.
(B) There is not a single majority in the United States; there are many majorities, each composed of a different collection of individuals and each acting as a restraint on the others.

If we know there is no single majority but multiple majorities, then it would weaken the point.
A- framers of the Constitution wanted to separate the 3 branches- I'm sure they wanted that but it doesn't explain the challenge with the majority rule.
C- grants citizens rights to petition but again if the govt is ruled by majority, those petitions may not lead to anything.
D- everyone can participate, great. You could still just have the majority getting elected and we're back to square one.
E- again, framers may have had 2 concerns but it doesn't weaken what the last 2 paragraphs say.

5. The author’s treatment of the topic of the passage can best be described as 
(C) logical

Use the process of elimination for this. Deifnitely not ironic or neutral. The author clearly has a point of view. Irreverent is rude and diffident is shy so both out.

6. In the passage, the author is primarily concerned with 
(A) challenging a commonly held belief

The author is challenging the commonly held belief that democracy or majority rule is good. 
B- not contrasting 2 views. There is no other view discussed.
C- the author isn't advocating any course of action. They simply state how majority leads to absolute power, but they really don't mention how else to go about it. So this is out.
D- The author is not reconciling anything. This would have only been possible is there was another view discussed.
E- author isn't proposing any solution and certainly not to an uncrecognized problem.

TBT · Answer

This is a long passage. Took me nearly 5 mints to read this. This is pre 2000s passage. Can someone tell that should we expect such long passages in GMAT now too?

TBT · Answer

For Q6. "For these reasons we should not willingly invest any group of our fellows with that unlimited authority which we should refuse to any individual" doesn't this suggest a course of action? The author clearly has an opinion. How to elininate c?

egmat · Answer

Hey TBT , Yes, this is indeed a long passage. And yes, we do still find passages of this length in the GMAT. Here's an OG'22 passage that's 50 lines long: https://gmatclub.com/forum/in-the-sonor ... 42586.html, 10 lines longer than the passage in this thread. As a fair estimate, long passages usually have a total of four short paragraphs on average. Hope this helps. Abhishek

egmat · Answer

Hey  TBT

Happy to help.

We need to understand this last line in the context of the first paragraph. Note that the first paragraph merely seeks to establish that a "majority" is not different from an "individual".  The implication of this last sentence is that we can expect a majority to misuse absolute power, just as we'd expect an individual to .

When we say " course of action ", it  must be understood in the context of the problem explained and the course of action/solution prescribed to solve that problem . The problem has been defined in the last two paragraphs:  the absolute power (tyranny) of the democratic institutions of the United States . (Highlighted below)

However, no solution or course of action has been explicitly prescribed by the author. This is why choice C is   incorrect  .

Now, let's understand why choice A is correct :

Read the following highlighted lines in the first paragraph...

This  rhetorical question  in the first paragraph suggests that the author is opposing a commonly held view:  that a democracy is always better, more noble, than a dictatorship; that we can expect an emperor/ruler to become a tyrant but not a democracy .

Hence, through this passage, the author challenges this belief. This is why A is the best of the given choices.

I hope this helps.

Happy Learning!

Abhishek

Vatsal7794 · Answer

Hi Experts

GMATNinja  @VeritasKarishma  EducationAisle   ChrisLele   mikemcgarry   AjiteshArun   egmat   sayantanc2k   RonPurewal   DmitryFarber   MagooshExpert   avigutman   EMPOWERgmatVerbal   MartyTargetTestPrep   ExpertsGlobal5   IanStewart 
other experts  AnthonyRitz

In question 4

Why ans is not E 
As far as I can understand we need to find the answer that can tell us that there is no majority is US or Majority don't exercise the power due to some rules of the government
And that's what option E is saying
"(E) The framers of the U.S. Constitution had two primary concerns: to prevent the government from exercising tyranny over the people and to prevent the majority from exercising tyranny over the minority"

I understood how the answer is B but facing difficulty in eliminating option E

Can you please help??

egmat · Answer

Hey  Vatsal7794 ,

Happy to help.

Two things : 
 
  Just because the constitution was framed keeping certain objectives in mind, it is not necessary that the constitution actually accomplished those objectives when it was enforced.  
  The argument in the last paragraph rests on the assumption that there is a singular majority in the US. Because of this singular majority, comparable to a dictator or a tyrant, all instruments of power and control are vested in the hands of this majority, be it the legislature, the executive, the judiciary, or the public army. In other words, dissent has died a silent death. So, the simplest way to weaken this argument is to divide that majority into multiple, competing majorities. In other words, to introduce dissent. The minute you do that, you create opposition to the ruling majority; and where there is opposition, tyranny is kept under control. This is why simply stating the objectives of the constitution does not weaken the argument. The passage presents us with a development after the implementation of that constitution. We need address this current reality.

For these reasons, choice E is incorrect and B, correct.

I hope this helps.

Happy Learning!

Abhishek

RonPurewal · Answer

This is exactly what we want in problem 4, yes.

It's not.
Choice E says only that the original Framers  WANTED  (= "had the concern") to check the absolute power of majorities. Choice E indicates nothing about whether the Framers' Constitution  actually accomplished  either of these ends.

This is not a small or subtle distinction, by the way. The  intent  of some behavior is entirely different from the  actual results  of that behavior—which could end up anywhere from achieving the original intent exactly, to accomplishing the opposite of what was originally intended, or anywhere in between. An action could also have results that are entirely independent of, and therefore irrelevant to, the original intent.

Please note the contrast with choice B, which, if taken as true, gives us something that  factually IS true about majorities  in the U.S. right now. The pertinence of choice B is thus certain; your only real job with B is to make sure it goes in the direction you actually want (i.e., to double-check that it isn't a WRONG-WAY answer).

RonPurewal · Answer

Just for completeness, I also want to call your attention to one other problematic element of choice E: namely, its complete focus on the Framers of the Constitution—i.e., the Constitution's original writers, who did that work back at the very founding of the United States.

That was almost 250 years ago. The Constitution has changed quite a lot since then; there are now 25 additional amendments in force, above and beyond the original Articles. (26 Amendments have been ratified over time, but one was entirely repealed.)
Those numbers aren't the important part, though; what matters is really just the fact that the Constitution has evolved quite a lot since the late XVIII century. Since the core values/concerns expressed in the last two paragraphs are PRESENT issues, choice E is  at very best  only partially relevant right from the beginning—before we even consider any specifics! E is only relevant insofar as today's Constitution is still substantively the same as that of the Framers, or at least similar enough to ensure that concerns and values originally expressed in the late XVIIIc are still valid today, and in essentially the same ways with respect to the text. 
That's a big ask after 250 years have gone by! So, there's no reason to be terribly confident that issues raised by the Framers are even still issues anymore—let alone to enough of an extent to validate choice E as relevant.

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot:

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

This post was generated automatically.

A majority taken collectively may be regarded as a being whose opinion

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

A majority taken collectively may be regarded as a being whose opinion

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