PT14.S4.Q11 > Analytics

Hide analysis

Conservative: Support Socialists begin their arguments with an analysis of history, from which they claim to derive certain trends leading inevitably to a socialist future. ███ ██ ███ ██████████ ████████ ██ ███████ █████ ███ █████ ████ ███████████ ███████ ████ ██ ██████████ ████ █████████████ ███████ ███ ███████ ██████ ███████ █████████ ████████████ ███ ██████████ █████████

██████████ ██ ██ ███████ ███ ███████ ██ ███████ ████ ███████████ ██ █████ ███ ████ ██ ████ ██ █████████ ███ ████████████ ██ ██████████ ████████ ███ ██ █████████ ████ ██ ████ █████ ██████████ █████ ███ ██ ███ ████ ██████████ ████ ██ ██ ████████ ██ █████ ████████ ████ ██ ███ ██████████ ████████ ██ █████████ ██ █████████ █████████

Conservative's Argument

The conservative's argument leads to the unstated conclusion that socialist historical analysis doesn't support socialists' conclusions. The conservative claims that socialists think their analysis of trends indicates an inevitable socialist future. But such trends can't be analyzed during the current moment—only in retrospect. This is because history isn't really inevitable, but rather results from accident, contingency, and individual struggle.

In other words, the conservative's argument aims to deny a key assumption of what the conservative thinks socialist analysis aims to accomplish.

Socialist's Argument

The socialist concludes that historical analysis is important to socialist argument, but for different reasons than the conservative thinks. The socialist supports this by explaining that socialists would only work to transform capitalist institutions if they thought history was not inevitable. And transforming institutions requires understanding them, which requires historical analysis.

Aside from supporting the socialist's conclusion, the socialist's premises have an important implication: that socialists indeed work to transform institutions, meaning the conservative is mistaken about what they assume.

11.

In the dispute the issue ███████ ███ █████████ ███ ███ ████████████ ███ ████ ██████████ ██ █████████ ██ ███████

Question Type

Point at issue: disagree

There are a couple of disagreements we can pull out of the stimulus. First, the speakers seem to disagree on whether socialist historical analysis can accomplish its goals. The conservative thinks it can't, while the socialist speaks as though it can.

More fundamentally, the speakers also disagree on what the goals of socialist historical analysis are. The conservative thinks it aims at showing the inevitability of socialism, whereas the socialist says the point is to understand (and therefore transform) capitalist institutions.

a socialist society ██ ███ ██████████ ███████████ ██ ██████████ ██████ ████ ███ ██ ██████████ ██ ██ ████████ ██ ███████

Does historical trend analysis show that socialism is inevitable?

Conservative: ❌

Socialist: ❌

The conservative thinks that socialists think this, but the whole point of the conservative's argument is to show that this is not the case. The socialist thinks historical outcomes are not inevitable—that's why socialists work to reform society.

Both speakers disagree with this statement. Since they have the same opinion, it's not the point at issue.

26%

the institutions of ██████████ ███████ █████ ██ ████ ██ ██████████████

Do capitalist institutions need to be reformed?

Conservative: ❓

Socialist: ✅

The conservative never mentions an opinion on capitalist institutions. The socialist thinks it's important to transform capitalist institutions.

socialists’ arguments for ███ █████████████ ██ █████████ ███ █████████

Do socialists validly argue for the inevitability of socialism?

Conservative: ❌

Socialist: ❌

The conservative's argument aims to show a gap between socialists' alleged conclusions and their analytical methods. The socialist thinks the conservative is misguided—but only because socialists don't actually think history is inevitable to begin with.

Because both speakers reject the idea that socialist analysis shows the inevitability of socialism, this isn't the point at issue between them.

it is possible ███ ██████ ██ █████ ███ ███████ ██ ██████ ███ ██████ ██ ███████

Can people's efforts affect the course of history?

Conservative: ✅

Socialist: ✅

The conservative thinks that among other things, individual struggle can affect history. The socialist also talks about transforming institutions in a way that strongly implies believing that people's efforts can affect history.

Because the speakers agree on this point, it's not the point in dispute between them.

11%

socialists analyze history ██ █████ ██ ███████ ███ ████ ████ █████████ ██ ██████████

Does socialist historical analysis aim to show that socialism is inevitable?

Conservative: ✅

Socialist: ❌

The conservative thinks this is the goal of socialist analysis. The socialist thinks historical analysis is actually a necessary condition to transform institutions, and that history isn't inevitable at all.

55%

PrepTest 14 - Section 4 - Question 11

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.

Confirm action