#10 - People often admonish us to learn the lessons of

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Method of Reasoning—AP. The correct answer choice is (D)

This Method of Reasoning question asks us to determine what role a specific phrase plays in the argument. The argument begins with a general statement that “people” say that we should learn the lessons of history. It continues, arguing that as a practical matter, it is often an impossible task. First, we cannot necessarily understand what lessons the past are meant to teach. Additionally, even if we understood the lessons, we could not apply them, as the situations that occurred in the past are never going to occur in the exact same way again.

Argument Part questions ask us to determine how the idea that “we should learn the lessons of history” impacts the argument. In the argument, this idea is prefaced with the word “people,” which is a way the author can indicate his or her disagreement with an idea. By introducing an idea as something that people, or others, believe, the author creates separation between his or her views and a general belief. The rest of the argument sets out reasons the author believes that the idea is incorrect.

Answer choice (A): The argument does not attempt to solve the problem of how to learn from history. It only argues that it does not seem possible to learn the lessons.

Answer choice (B): The author concludes that it is impossible to discover the lessons of the past. That conclusion is not compatible with the idea that one should learn the lessons of history, because one cannot learn something that is impossible to discover.

Answer choice (C): The argument does not simply take the statement as false; it offers clear reasons for believing that it is false. To take something for granted, the author would simply state a fact, and build from that without offering further support for that position. Since the author supports his or her opinion through the entire argument, the author does not take for granted that the statement is false.

Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer choice. The author introduces the idea as an anti-conclusion, an idea that the entire argument is structured to disprove. Anti-conclusions are often introduced by words such as “people,” “other,” or “there are those.” We can also recognize it as an anti-conclusion because it is immediately followed by a statement that the idea is incorrect.

Answer choice (E): Since the argument is meant to disprove the statement, it cannot be required for the argument.

[netherlands]

Hi there PS,

I asked a question like this before but still am bad at interpreting what "It is compatible with accepting the argument's conclusion and denying it"

Just in a very watered down way, does this just mean it's a neutral point. For instance in this question, these two thoughts considered incompatible, correct?

- People often admonish us to learn the lessons of history
- It is impossible to discover the lessons of history

Basically - people say to do one thing, but doing it is impossible, thus incompatible.

And something that is compatible could technically be neutral, correct? Basically have no effect.

[Steve Stein]

Hey netherlands,

If the portion quoted were, for example, "Lessons can be valuable," that's clearly not taking any kind of stand-- this statement would be compatible with accepting the conclusion that "discovering history's lessons is nearly impossible," and it would also be compatible with rejecting that conclusion.

You likely know this already, but note that the correct answer to this question is D; The notion that we should learn the lessons of history is the position that the passage in general seeks to discredit.

I hope that's helpful! Please let me know whether this is clear--thanks!

~Steve

[ericau02]

Would it also be safe to say that ac (E) is incorrect because it is not an assumption, but more so a fact a claim or belief of the idea that lessons can be learned from past history?

I am in the process of blind reviewing and want to be sure that I am addressing my contenders and losers in the correct manner or for the correct reasons.

[Brook Miscoski]

Erica, your explanation is correct, but it might help to take a slightly different angle.

(E) is incorrect because an assumption is something that is unstated in the stimulus. The only way you would pick "assumption" as the answer to an argument parts question is if the stimulus explicitly indicated that it was assuming or presuming information (don't hold your breath for this to happen, though it could).

(E) is also incorrect because the referenced excerpt is in direct opposition to the conclusion. It's impossible for the conclusion to require that the excerpt be true.

[ericau02]

Thanks so much Brook!!!! So would this angle be a better approach to take in regards to Argument Part questions ?

[Adam Tyson]

Certainly you want to be wary of answers to Method-AP questions that talk about assumptions, because as Brook said, assumptions are NOT in the argument (they are unstated). Here's my process for answering these questions - I use a three-question checklist, as follows:

1. Is it a premise? In other words, did the claim that they asked me about support some other claim in the stimulus?

2. Is it a conclusion? That is, did the claim in question get some support from another claim?

Now stop - I know that's just two questions, not three, but most Method-AP questions can be answered at this stage. There are 4 possible sets of answers to those two questions:

1. No to the first, yes to the second. That means you are looking at the Main Point, and you should look for that in the answer choices.

2. Yes to the first, no to the second. That means you are looking at a simple premise - go find that answer.

3. Yes to both. That means you are looking at an Intermediate Conclusion. Go find that answer choice.

4. No to both. This is rare, but it happens, and it is what happens in this case. Now, finally, ask yourself the third question: What the heck was it? It could be "the thing the author seeks to discredit", or maybe "extraneous information", or perhaps "an example/illustration". Perhaps it is some other thing. Worst case scenario here is that I eliminate every answer that describes a premise or a conclusion, because I know it isn't one of those things! In this case, the claim in question is the claim that the author wants to disprove, and he offers evidence against it. Bad evidence, but still evidence. Answers A and C should be quickly disposed of, and answer E as well for the reason Brook provided.

Try that checklist approach and see if these questions become much easier for you. Good luck!

[ericau02]

Wow thank you sm Adam, this really changed my perspective of method AP questions and I think I will be able to accurately asses the acs in a timely manner with this checklist in mind.

[fork4k]

I'm a bit confused about why this isn't B. The passage doesn't say that it's *impossible* to learn the lessons, it says it's *nearly* impossible. If we accepted the argument's conclusion we could still hold that we *should* learn the lessons of history, since at least sometimes it is possible to do so (because of "nearly") and whether we can apply the lessons might be irrelevant to whether we should learn them.

[Dana D]

Hey fork4k,

Remember that question type matters, this is not a could be true question, but rather an argument part. The test wants us to identify how that phrase works within the author's argument, which is why (D) is correct over (B).

The idea that "we should learn the lessons of history" actually contradicts the author's point, because they seem to believe that this is a difficult and likely pointless endeavor since we will never be under the exact same conditions to even apply the lessons learned again.

Hope that helps!