#24 - Parallel Reasoning

[moshei24]

I just want to be sure my reasoning is correct in this one as it is a very abstract question.

The answer is (A) because the first proposal called for education for all, but didn't stress equality between sexes and girls were pulled out when they were eight to do domestic work, so it's like housing being available for all; and the second proposal specifically was for equality of men and women in schooling, and even though women were still the main focus in the domestic sphere, they still didn't lose in the educational sphere, as they weren't pulled out of school at the age of 8 like in the first proposal (so there wasn't any discrimination in their education like there was in the first proposal), and this is similar to real estate practices being nondiscriminatory, as that is saying that the housing that is made available to all should be equal for all.

Thanks!

[Nikki Siclunov]

You are correct, but you are going into way too much detail. This is a very abstract question, similar to Parallel Reasoning questions in LR.

The first proposal insisted that education be available to everyone (line 22), while the second proposal presumed equal rights for men and women (lines 33-35). This relationship is analogous to a pair of proposals concerning housing reform, whereby the first proposal demands equal access to housing, while the second insists that real estate practices be nondiscriminatory. That's all.

[moshei24]

And real estate practices is the same as housing practices? I think I overlooked that during the exam. (And I think you meant housing being available to all, not equal housing in the first part of answer (A) if I'm not mistaken, as equal access to housing seems to be different than housing being available to all, as equal access would seem to imply non-discriminatory).

Thanks!

[deck1134]

My (very general) prephrase was:

"Somehow more access to education or more equal, then something about true equality."

That led me to (A) and (D). I then eliminated (D) because it wasn't about quality improvement in a direct sense (though certainly indirectly).

Is that an okay prephrase and logic?

[akanshalsat]

I still don't understand why C is wrong -- how is the second part of A fulfilling the question?

[wannabelawyer]

Answer choice A seems incorrect to me as the second proposal is in some ways self-contradictory. “In other respects, however, this proposal also continued to define women in terms of their roles in the domestic sphere and as mothers” does not to me equate to “non-discriminatory.”

I am not sure how we’re supposed to arrive at an analogy of non-discriminatory housing practices from a proposal that the author states is discriminatory in its definition of women.

Is it just because the educational opportunity itself is analogous to “Real estate practices” specifically? Still seems a stretch to me, though admittedly the answer I picked didn’t make much sense to me, either.

[James Finch]

Hi guys,

This is a tough question because of the way the answer choices are phrased. This necessitates a good prephrase, because even a relatively small misunderstanding of the meaning of either what is presented in the passage or the answer choices can lead to picking an incorrect answer choice.

Deck1134 - That's a pretty good prephrase, and likely the reason you were able to correctly answer the question. I would add in that both proposals were state-sponsored and free for all citizens, but that the first made a clear distinction between the sexes where the second did not. (A) gives us that distincition: having "access" to something doesn't necessarily mean equal access to all parts of a thing, while "non-discriminatory" does imply equal access.

Moshei - "Housing" would fall into the broader group of "real estate practices" in my mind. While real estate tends to be used almost exclusively in terms of buying and selling property, it does have the broader meaning of anything to do with real property/land. This could be access like easements, or rent-control ordinances, or housing subsidies or even licensing of realtors.

Wannabelawyer - The actual policy described was non-discriminatory ("equal education") even if the definitions were, according to the author, implicitly discriminatory towards women. The author does allow us to infer that the clear intent of the second policy, unlike the first, is to promote the equality of the sexes, by combating the traditional religious schooling that these policymakers believed perpetuated inequality.

akanshalat - The distinction between answer choices (C) and (A) is that (C) explicitly contains something that neither of the proposals described in the paragraph does: payment. Both proposals involve free schooling, so that alone should make it a suspect answer choice. The second part does fit with the second proposal, but this still only makes this a half-right answer choice, so it is ultimately completely wrong.

Contrast this to (A), where we see the availability to all represented in the first proposal (albeit differential levels of availability) and the principle of non-discrimination that undergirds the second proposal.

Hope this clears things up!

[ashpine17]

I was totally at a loss of what to even pre phrase for this question. I do not know what to do for this like where do i even begin. I do not know what to pre phrase because both proposals looked similar tp me except the second was mpre comprehensive so i had thought it was an improvement on the first but the answers with improvement were all wrong

[Luke Haqq]

Hi ashpine17!

While it might be difficult to know where to start in terms of prephrasing, one can at least know where to start generally, as the question stem indicates that it's referring to the second paragraph.

The second paragraph introduces two proposals. The first "endeavored to replace the predominantly religious education that women originally received in convents and at home with reformed curricula. More importantly, the proposal insisted that, because education was a common good that should be offered to both sexes, instruction should be available to everyone" (lines 16-22). The second "advocated equal education for women and men on the grounds that women and men enjoy the same rights, and it was the only proposal of the time that called for coeducational schools, which were presented as a bulwark against the traditional gender roles enforced by religious tradition" (lines 33-38).

In the first proposal, a suggestion is being made that education "should be available to everyone." This corresponds with "Housing should be made available to all" in answer choice (A). The second option offers coeducational schools and equal rights for women and men--i.e., not discriminating between them. This corresponds with "Real estate practices should be nondiscriminatory" in (A).