#9 - Must Be True, Author’s Perspective

[moshei24]

Okay, thanks.

[setheli]

Hi,

Does C fail the fact test? It says "It is unfortunate that most...", and I can't find any mention of most in the text. The line about the salutary shock could refer to 40% (thus, not most) of literature omitting that perspective.

I am grateful for any clarification you might offer.

[Francis O'Rourke]

Hi Setheli,

This is a great question. First, if you believe that the author never dealt with the idea of most ethnographic literature, then the question itself would be unanswerable, since the question directly asks for the author's opinion on most. In the middle of the test, if you feel that the question itself is incorrect, that is a sign that you are either misreading the question, you are misreading the information, or you should push your concerns to the side and humor the test makers.

In addition to the evidence in lines 41-43, I would point to lines 4-6. Here the author states that ethnographers have a penchant for the general and anonymous. Since they have a penchant - or a tendency - for the anonymous, we can infer that most of the time ethnographers do not deal with any individual perspectives, let alone the perspective of women.

[sicm91]

Hey! I feel like I've been taught in my LSAT studies to be suspicious of answer choices that bring in words like "most" without it being mentioned in the passage. Is this not the case with answer choice C? Thanks!

[Rachael Wilkenfeld]

Hi sicm,

I understand your hesitancy to pick strong language. But remember, it's not that strong language is always wrong, it just has to be adequately supported. Here, we can support the term most because it tells us that it's a "shock" to realize that so much of this literature omits women's perspective on women. If something is shocking, it's something that doesn't happen often. It certainly wouldn't be something that we see most of the time. That's what supports the idea of "most" that we see in the correct answer choice.

Hope that helps!

[cgs174]

Hi! Like others I was drawn away from C) by the use of the word most, which I don't see to be supported in the passage. While I read though the support others found I don't see how that support is sufficient to state that more than 50% of ethnographic literature fails to give women's take on women. The evidence that one is surprised by how widespread a problem is at all equivalent to that problem being a majority (for example, one could be shocked at a murder rate of 30% and agree this is a major problem). I had hesitations with D), mainly that interviews weren't expressly mentioned and are not the only way to get women's views on women but I felt quite strongly that C) didn't pass a Fact Check.

[Robert Carroll]

cgs174,

This point about answer choice (C) is a quibble. Remember that there is one correct answer to every question. So, while "most" might have been uncomfortable in the answer, there's absolutely no basis for any other answer. To seek out something better than answer choice (C) is good, because that word "most" might be too strong. But none of the other answers given address our need - everything else is worse to such an extent that there is no reasonable basis for any other answer.

Robert Carroll

[Henry Z]

Why is (D) wrong?

I eliminated (C), like many, because of its strong language, not only "most" but also "at all". It also bothers me that "women's views about women" doesn't equal "the perspective of women": it's possible that most ethnographic lit deal with women's views about women from the perspective of the male authors. I prefer (D) because it's the very thing that causes the shock (lines 39-42), so it must be the case that such a thing is rare in ethnographic studies. If what is described in lines 39-42 is routine in ethnographic studies, then the perspective of women about women can hardly be omitted. And "more" in (D) seems much safer than "most...at all" in (C).

The only justification of (C) I can think of is that (D) talks about a slightly different genre: "ethnographic studies of women." Likewise, (E) talks about "ethnographic studies of women’s views about women". Can we eliminate (D) and (E) because the passage and the question talk only about the general "ethnographic studies"?

[Adam Tyson]

Your analysis at the end of your post is exactly what I was going to say, Henry. The focus of the answer is too narrow in looking only at a subset of ethnographic literature that deals with studies of women. The shock is that this perspective is largely missing from the whole genre! Also, it's not just that the literature doesn't use the information that is available through those interviews, but that it doesn't let us hear those views directly from the mouths of the women themselves. Perhaps a lot of the literature uses that info, but then filters it through a male perspective.

I also wanted to address this from your post:

it's possible that most ethnographic lit deal with women's views about women from the perspective of the male authors.

Sounds to me like you're talking about "men's views about women's views about women," which is getting very convoluted, but which also misses the point about what's missing. What the passage tells us is that ethnography already has a whole lot of mansplaining going on, and it's shocking that we have so little about women that is DIRECTLY from the views of women. Enough with the male perspective, for crying out loud!