PT158.S1.P3.Q18 > Analytics

Hide analysis

Passage A is adapted from an essay by historian Christopher Ricks; passage B is from the introduction, by historian Paulina Kewes, to a book in which Ricks's essay appears.

███████ █

Rosenthal's Purpose · To question definition of plagiarism

Rosenthal's answer · The required postmodern answer

Postmodern answer = there's no difference between plagiarism and things that people don't think are plagiarism. It's just about power; if people in power don't like certain copying, it's plagiarism.

Rosenthal's assumption · Plagiarism doesn't involve a moral issue; it's about power

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

Ricks' perspective · Political history should involve moral considerations

Although there's no universal moral standard, that doesn't mean moral standards shouldn't exist. (Not sure what "political history" means, but clearly Rosenthal's book is an example of it.)

███████ █

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

Intro topic · Plagiarism

Accusations of plagiarism in history have been very fluid, and are influenced by commercial, artistic, and legal views. Sometimes the same act has been called plagiarism and not plagiarism.

Ricks' perspective · Critical of historical approach to ethical issues

He thinks it leads to moral relativism, which he thinks is bad.

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

Author's criticism · Ricks paints with too broad a brush

Some historical approaches might be good, even if others are bad.

Concession · Ricks is right to criticize some scholarship

Not all moral standards are just about power, and it can be wrong to project modern-day ideologies onto past events. Ricks is right to make these points.

Author's perspective · Ricks is too extreme

Some historical scholarship can still be good, even if there's a lot of bad scholarship out there. Recognizing different historical understandings of plagiarism doesn't imply any agreement with one or more of those understandings.

Passage Style

18.

It can be inferred that ███ ██████ ██ ███████ █ ███████ ███ ██████████ ████████ ██ ███ ██████ ██ ███████ █ ██

Question Type

Author’s attitude

Implied

This is an Implied question about author B’s attitude toward author A’s historical approach, so we can only answer this question after we’ve read through passage B. We know that author B agrees with author A on some points. She thinks that he’s right to dismiss “the postmodern reduction of moral standards to expressions of power,” and to claim that some scholars wrongly project current ideologies onto historical issues. But author B also seems to think that author A criticizes historical approaches too broadly. While there are some problematic historical approaches, there are also good ones, and history is still important. In other words, she thinks that he oversimplifies things in his argument.

irresponsible

Unsupported. Author B never suggests that author A’s approach is irresponsible. In fact, she agrees with him on many points. She just thinks that he oversimplifies the issue by discussing historical approaches too broadly.

11%

incomprehensible

Unsupported. Author B never suggests that author A’s approach is difficult to comprehend or understand. In fact, she seems to fully comprehend his argument and she agrees with him on many points. She just thinks that his essay is too simplistic and that he discusses historical approaches too broadly.

deceitful

Unsupported. Author B never suggests that author A is trying to deceive his readers in any way. She actually agrees with him on a few points. She just thinks that his approach oversimplifies the issue of historical scholarship.

simplistic

Supported. Author B agrees with author A on some points. But she also thinks that he criticizes historical approaches too broadly. While there are some problematic historical approaches, there are also good ones, and history is still important. She thinks that he dismisses historical scholarship too broadly, and that his argument is overly simplistic.

69%

reprehensible

Unsupported. Author B never suggests that author A’s approach is morally wrong. She actually agrees with him on a few of his key points. She just thinks that his approach oversimplifies the issue of historical scholarship.

10%

PrepTest 158 - Section 1 - Passage 3 - Question 18

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action