Events & Promotions
|
|
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.
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
05 Mar 2020, 02:01
Kudos
Bookmarks
E
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
95%
(hard)
Question Stats:
39% (02:32) correct
61%
(02:26)
wrong
based on 256
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Conservative: Socialists begin their arguments with an analysis of history, from which they claim to derive certain trends leading inevitably to a socialist future. But in the day-to-day progress of history there are never such discernible trends. Only in retrospect does inevitability appear, for history occurs through accident, contingency, and individual struggle.
Socialist: If we thought the outcome of history were inevitable, we would not work so hard to transform the institutions of capitalist society. But to transform them we must first understand them, and we can only understand them by an analysis of their history. This is why historical analysis is important in socialist argument.
In the dispute the issue between the socialist and the conservatives can most accurately be described as whether
(A) a socialist society is the inevitable consequence of historical trends that can be identified by an analysis of history
(B) the institutions of capitalist society stand in need of transformation
(C) socialists’ arguments for the inevitability of socialism are justified
(D) it is possible for people by their own efforts to affect the course of history
(E) socialists analyze history in order to support the view that socialism is inevitable
05 Mar 2020, 03:22
Kudos
Bookmarks
(A) cannot be correct. The conservative never says that socialism is inevitable, so we don't know his opinion. The socialist disagrees. So we have an unknown opinion and a disagree.
(B) is incorrect. The socialist agrees, but we have no evidence regarding the conservative's opinion on this issue.
(C) is incorrect. The conservative would disagree, but the socialist would not agree -- the socialist does not even agree that such arguments exist, so the question of whether those arguments are "justified" is a non-issue
(D) cannot be correct. The conservative says that "history occurs through accident, contingency, and individual struggle." The last part there indicates the conservative would agree with this answer. The socialist also thinks that socialists can change the world, so the socialist would agree with this answer as well. So both agree, and this cannot be the Point at Issue.
(E) is the CORRECT ANSWER. Here is what the two disagree about. The conservative claims that socialists analyze history in order to find an inevitable trend toward socialism; the socialist counters that if socialists believed history were inevitable, they wouldn't try to change anything, so they obviously think their actions have an effect and history is not inevitable. So the socialist reason for analyzing history is NOT its inevitability. Phrased more simply, the conservative says "This is why you analyze history" and the socialist says "We do analyze history, but for a different reason." So their disagreement is about why socialists do a certain thing, analyzing history. The disagreement is NOT about whether history is inevitable.
FINAL ANSWER IS (E)
(B) is incorrect. The socialist agrees, but we have no evidence regarding the conservative's opinion on this issue.
(C) is incorrect. The conservative would disagree, but the socialist would not agree -- the socialist does not even agree that such arguments exist, so the question of whether those arguments are "justified" is a non-issue
(D) cannot be correct. The conservative says that "history occurs through accident, contingency, and individual struggle." The last part there indicates the conservative would agree with this answer. The socialist also thinks that socialists can change the world, so the socialist would agree with this answer as well. So both agree, and this cannot be the Point at Issue.
(E) is the CORRECT ANSWER. Here is what the two disagree about. The conservative claims that socialists analyze history in order to find an inevitable trend toward socialism; the socialist counters that if socialists believed history were inevitable, they wouldn't try to change anything, so they obviously think their actions have an effect and history is not inevitable. So the socialist reason for analyzing history is NOT its inevitability. Phrased more simply, the conservative says "This is why you analyze history" and the socialist says "We do analyze history, but for a different reason." So their disagreement is about why socialists do a certain thing, analyzing history. The disagreement is NOT about whether history is inevitable.
FINAL ANSWER IS (E)
General Discussion
05 Mar 2020, 22:10
Kudos
Bookmarks
E is the right answer.
We are to determine the answer choice that most accurately describes the issue between the socialist and the conservatives in the dispute above.
To answer this question, one only needs to focus on the conclusions of both arguments. Clearly it can be inferred that the contention is whether the socialist depends on the analysis of historical trends in order to advocate for a socialist future. While the conservatives believe that the socialists depend on the historical trends in order to push for a socialist future, the socialist says that such analysis are only done in order to better understand the institutions of capitalist society and that the decision to transform the capitalist society was taken before the analysis of historical events. Based on this answer choice E is the right answer.
Quote:
Quote:
We are to determine the answer choice that most accurately describes the issue between the socialist and the conservatives in the dispute above.
To answer this question, one only needs to focus on the conclusions of both arguments. Clearly it can be inferred that the contention is whether the socialist depends on the analysis of historical trends in order to advocate for a socialist future. While the conservatives believe that the socialists depend on the historical trends in order to push for a socialist future, the socialist says that such analysis are only done in order to better understand the institutions of capitalist society and that the decision to transform the capitalist society was taken before the analysis of historical events. Based on this answer choice E is the right answer.
Quote:
As stated above, the contention between the socialist and the conservatives is about whether socialists depend on historical trends to propose a socialist future. A is incorrect.
Quote:
No. This is not the contention per the reasoning provided above.
Quote:
The contention is not about whether the socialist's arguments for the inevitability of socialism are justified. In fact, the argument above is not about the inevitability of socialism but rather about whether socialists use historical trends to justify the need for a socialist future.
Quote:
This is completely out of scope.
