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.
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.
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.)
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.
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.
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.
a
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.
b
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.
c
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.
d
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.
e
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.
Difficulty
68% of people who answer get this correct
This is a moderately difficult question.
It is somewhat easier than other questions in this passage.
CURVE
Score of students with a 50% chance of getting this right
25%138
151
75%164
Analysis
Author’s attitude
Implied
Comparative
Humanities
Answer Popularity
PopularityAvg. score
a
11%
159
b
6%
152
c
5%
153
d
68%
163
e
10%
156
Question history
You don't have any history with this question.. yet!
You've discovered a premium feature!
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Subscribers can learn all the LSAT secrets.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.