#26 - Global Reference, Must Be True

[Administrator]

Complete Answer Explanation

This is a Global Reference, Primary Purpose question. A good prephrase is a summary of the main idea of the passage:

• This passage is a description of the work of Charlotte Gilman and her contributions to the theory of Social Darwinism, specifically its collective social and ethical implications.

Compare this prephrase to the answer choices.

• A) Is the passage a defense of Gilman? Against whom? It's not really a defense. It's just telling us some information about Gilman, whom we may infer the author admires. Also, this answer choice refers to views "promulgated by a particular group of writers and activists." This phrasing is too broad. The passage is narrowly focused on Gilman.
  
  B) This is the credited response. "Description" matches our prediction on the nose. Who is the "particular writer?" Gilman.
  What was the intellectual controversy? Whether or not it is futile to act to improve society (c.f. ll 9-20) What was the "scientific theory?" Social Darwinism. We have a total match here.
  
  C) This is not an "explication" (a detailed explanation) of theoretical points. Moreover, these social theories have differing goals.
  
  D) There is no alternative view of Gilman present. Moreover, this is not a defense, as noted in the explanation for A.
  
  E) This is not an introduction to Social Darwinism writ large. The passage is focused on Gilman in particular.

[T.B.Justin]

Hey PS,

Thanks for the explanation. I want to be sure my thoughts are attune to the likely consequences being discussed in the passage.

I think the consequences being discussed of Social Darwinism: the changes in human societies and what is the best way to promote them moving forward.

[dbrowning]

I eliminated answer 'B' because I could not find anything related to the "consequences of a scientific theory". I thought that "consequences" would refer to a passage where information is presented about things that happened in a society as a result of this theory, if that makes sense (maybe something like: "society regressed as a result of social darwinist thinkers).

I chose answer E, because the latter half of the first paragraph certainly seems like an "introduction to a general type of scientific theory". Is E wrong simply because Social Darwinism is a social theory rather than a scientific one, or did I miss something else? I was surprised when I missed this question, because E fit my prephrase nicely.

[Brook Miscoski]

dbrowning,

The reason for eliminating (E) is not the difference between social theories (really, hypotheses) and science. Social hypotheses are falsifiable and can be studied as science. Additionally, the correct choice refers to science.

The strongest reasons for eliminating (E) are as follows:

1. The passage introduces a theory, not a type of theory.
2. The passage hasn't clarified much.
3. There is actually not much detail at all.
4. Misses the contrast between the two visions of social darwinism.

Your reason for eliminating (B) can be avoided by more care during the reading of the passage:

1. First group argued that biological evolution means society is "strictly determined."
2. Second group agreed that evolution does happen on a social level, but that we're smart enough to affect the process.
3. Specific writer argues that this means we have responsibilities to affect the process.

All those things are consequences--results.

[ange.li6778]

Hi powerscore, from the analytics I can see that equal proportions of students picked B and E so obviously E was a very good trap answer (which I also fell for). My issue with B was that I did not think the disagreement between other social Darwinists and Gilman's camp rose to the level of "intellectual controversy." E was not perfect but it seemed better than B. What are some strategies I can use in the future to pick the right answer and not fall for a very tempting trap answer? Thank you!

[Adam Tyson]

One tip is not to eliminate an answer for being "imperfect" in some way, ange.li6778. The right answer doesn't have to be perfect, but just "the best answer" when compared to the other four choices. Too often I see students rejecting an answer because it uses words and phrases that they might not have chosen themselves if they writing their own answer choice. While you might feel that "intellectual controversy" is too strong, that doesn't mean it is inaccurate or that it is unsupported by the passage. A controversy is just a disagreement, and the word does not, by itself, indicate how vigorous the debate is or how strongly the opposing parties feel about it. The fact that there are at least two camps here - those who feel it is "futile to try to meddle with the competitive struggle for existence and the survival of the fittest" and the "more activist" types like Perkins Gilman - is enough to support that there is a controversy here.

There's an important distinction between an answer that appears to be more extreme than you might like and one that actually is too extreme to be supported by the passage at all, because it depends on information that is not provided. The authors know that many students will treat instances of the first type as if they are the second, and so they lay these traps for us, making answers that are actually perfectly good look a little ugly. When you get more open to and willing to select unattractive answers, you'll be more likely to select them when they are correct despite their first impression, and you'll at the same time be less likely to rationalize support for a bad answer (and Brook does a great job in this thread laying out all the things about answer E that make it really, really bad).

In short, be aware of LSAC's tendency to make right answers look worse than they are, and don't fall for it!

[ange.li6778]

Thanks for all your help, Adam!!

[lsatlies]

This passage is simply not describing the role played by a particular writer in the intellectual controversy they mention. There is certainly an "intellectual controversy over the consequences of a scientific theory" (the two branches of social darwnism disagreeing over the consequences of evolutionary theory in P1) but then it simply launches into a detailed explanation of Gilman's interpretation of the second camp and how she both interpreted and applied that theory.

There is literally zero mention of "the role [she] played" in the "intellectual controversy" which is not even ever mentioned but just offhandedly alluded to by the existence of two branches of social darwinism that disagree with each other over interpretation. It's never mentioned at all how Gilman interacted with this disagreement or other social darwinists. This "correct" answer is therefore completely unsupported and objectively worse than E.

[Jeff Wren]

Hi lsatlies,

I'm afraid that I have to disagree with your assessment, although I do see how this could be tricky. I expect that you are imagining a discussion of Gilman's "role" in a particular way, such as a discussion of how Gilman interacted with others in the movement, what impact she had on others, etc..

You're correct that:

"It's never mentioned at all how Gilman interacted with ... other social darwinists."

While such information certainly could have been included in fleshing out her role in the movement, the passage does describe how Gilman expressed her views about/her take on Social Darwinism through her writings. In other words, her views expressed in her writings represent her role in/contribution to the movement.

Here is some direct support/clues from the passage.

The passage begins, "The novelist and social theorist Charlotte Perkins Gilman, whose writings were widely read and discussed in the early twentieth century, played an important role in the debate about the theories of Charles Darwin and their application to society" (my emphasis)(lines 1-5). In other words, Gilman did have an important role in this debate through her writings, which were widely read and discussed, so a discussion of her views on this topic as expressed in her writings is a discussion of her role. This sentence alone basically makes Answer B correct. (Notice also that the word "controversy" in Answer B is a synonym for "debate" in line 4. Synonyms are often used in correct answers to "disguise" them, i.e getting at the same idea without using the exact same word from the passage.)

Paragraph three begins "Gilman was not merely engaged in an intellectual debate .... In both her fiction and her social theory she urges women to further social evolution by collectively working toward a reorganization of society" (my emphasis)(lines 39-46). Again this is a description of how Gilman contributed to/influenced this debate through her writings, which was her role in the debate.

One other recommendation in answering passage description questions (like this one) is to first review the main point of the passage, as this helps inform the answer to these questions. For example, the correct answer to question 21 (about the main point) focuses on Gilman's version of Social Darwinism and how she advised women about gender roles through her writings. Answer B perfectly fits with this Answer. (Of course, this strategy assumes that you've correctly identified the main point and therefore answered the Main Point question correctly. If not, this strategy could seriously backfire!)

Lastly, there's one major problem with Answer E that is easy to miss. The "scientific theory" refers to Darwin's theory of evolution (line 6), not Social Darwinism. In other words, this answer is describing "an introduction to (the theory of evolution), clarified by a detailed presentation of one writer's version of (the theory of evolution)." This is not at all what the passage does.

Answer B, on the other hand, discusses the "intellectual controversy over the consequences of a scientific theory" (my emphasis). The consequences of the scientific theory of evolution refer to its application to society, i.e. Social Darwinism.