#27 - Global Reference, Must Be True, Author's Perspective

[Beth Hayden]

Hi April,

I'm not sure if I'm understanding your question so please follow-up if I missed the mark!

(E) is saying that if you impose grand theories when you are interpreting historical events, you might miss something or get it wrong. The grand theories are not laws themselves, they are patterns that are used to explain things. Calling them patterns ties in with this idea of determinism, that things tend to happen in certain ways over and over again.

Hope that helps!
Beth

[Noodles93]

Quick question! Would this line allow us to confidently select E as the right answer? "Perhaps what is needed is a historical perspective that seeks to include, as grand theories did not and could not, the particular and unrepeatable details of historical events." So it's saying that the imposition of grand theories obscured details needed for fact, like what actually happened in history, and further silenced people who suggested the theories were inaccurate ("in certain intellectual circles, challenging them was tantamount to denying scientific fact").

I got this wrong because I thought understanding the grand theories actually helps us understand history because it shows the state of mind of a group of thinkers in time. We know today that their theories didn't completely hold up, but sociologically it's helpful to look back and understand that point in time. However, I understand the answer should come more directly from the passage, and not my own thoughts!

[Dana D]

Hey Noodles,

I think more support for answer choice (E) is the sentence just beyond the one you quoted "Rather than forcing these
details into an inflexible progression.." although the latter half of your quoted line is also key. It's not really that the grand theories missed details, but rather that they were so inflexible and sought to explain and predict all history and human development in a predetermined way. The author suggests that we move away from this line of thinking, as it has led to the overlooking of certain details and the acceptance that some historical events were novel (unrepeatable). Thus, answer choice (E) is correct, because it shows that our study of history has been hindered by the attempt to adhere to universal patterns (grand theories).

Hope that helps!

[nicizle]

Can someone explain why D is wrong? Someone asked this same question earlier in this thread, as that person's train of thought largely reflected mine, and it went unanswered.

Thanks.

[Luke Haqq]

Hi nicizle!

The previous post that was wondering about answer choice (D) stated:

Answer D) says "The works of Marx . historical perspective that should be used for studying events in the nineteenth century." And the passage itself suggests that the author believes: "as history has progressed.... revealed as products of their era." This leads me to believe that their perspectives were illustrative of the period they lived in and thus that they should be used for studying events in the nineteenth century.

You mention that this person's train of thought reflects yours as well. However, there seems to be a jump in this reasoning. It's true that the passage mentions the works of Marx and Freud as being "products of their era" (line 28). But there's nothing about that, nor anything in the context surrounding it or elsewhere that links this to what should be used "for studying events in the nineteenth century." In the end, we don't know the authors view on what should be used for studying events in the nineteenth century (feel free to point it out, if you see language that is explicit to that end). In addition, we're also told that the works of Freud and Marx have "inherent explanatory limitations" (line 29), which might be a reason against using them for studying events in the nineteenth century (again, though, there's nothing explicit to that end). In short, we'd need some more explicit language in the stimulus about what should be used for studying the nineteenth century in order for (D) to be a contender.