Self-study
Historian: The spread of literacy informs more people of injustices and, in the right circumstances, leads to increased capacity to distinguish true reformers from mere opportunists. ████████ ██████████ ████████ ██████████ ███████ ██████ ███ █████████████ ██████ ██ ███████ ██████████ █████ ██ ███ ████████ ███ ████████ ██ ██████████ ██ ██████ ██████████ ███████ ███ ███████ █████████████ ████ ██████████ ██████ ███████ ███ ██████████ ██ ███████ ██ █████ ███ █████████████ ████ ██ ████████ █████████
Summary
The author concludes that some harmless regimes might be toppled by their own move to increase literacy.
Why?
Because widespread literacy always emerges before a comprehensive system of education. Thus, before the comprehensive system of education comes about, people are vulnerable to demagogues calling for change.
Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that harmless regimes can be toppled by demagogues calling for change.
The author also assumes that a comprehensive system of education is necessary in order to avoid being vulnerable to demagogues calling for change.
19.
Which one of the following ██ ██ ██████████ ██ █████ ███ ███████████ ████████ ████████
a
A demagogue can █████ ██████ ███ ██████ ███████ █████████ ██ ██████ ██ ████████ ██████ ██████ █ █████████████ ██████ ██ ███████ █████████ ██ ██ ██████
Not necessary, because if it were not true — if a demagogue COULD get public support to topple a regime before a comprehensive system of general education is in place — that supports the author’s argument. The author’s position is that demagogues could topple a harmless regime. The negation of (A) doesn’t undermine that position or the support for it.
b
Without literacy there ███ ██ ██ ███████ █████████ ██ ███ █████████ ██ █ ████████
The author said that literacy informs “more” people of injustices. That doesn’t commit the author to thinking that people can’t generally be aware of injustice without literacy. Maybe they can be — it’s just that more people would be aware if literacy spread.
c
Any comprehensive system ██ ███████ █████████ ████ ████ ██ ████████ ███ █████████ ██ ██████ ████████
Not necessary, because the author’s argument concerns what makes a benign regime vulnerable. The author isn’t committed to any position regarding what would tend to preserve a benign regime.
d
A lack of ███████ █████████ ███████ ███ ███████ ██ █████████████ ███████ ██████████ ███ ████████████ █████ ███ ███████
Necessary, because if this were not true — if lack of a general education does NOT affect ability to differentiate between legitimate and illegitimate calls for reform — then we have no reason to think that literacy will make people vulnerable to demagogues. The negation of (D) allows for the possibility that people without general education can recognize illegitimate calls of reform from demagogues and won’t necessarily be vulnerable to them.
e
Any benign regime ████ █████ ██ ███████ █████████████ ███████ █████████ ████ ██ ███████ ██ █ ██████ ██████████
The certainty is too extreme here. The author never argues that a regime “will be toppled” by a demagogue. The conclusion is merely that some benign regimes “may” be toppled.