Reading Comprehension

PT115 · S1 · P3 · Q18 Haraway’s Primate Visions

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

  • Save & drill this skill build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Donna Haraway’s Primate Visions is the most ambitious book on the history of science yet written from a feminist perspective, embracing not only the scientific construction of gender but also the interplay of race, class, and colonial and postcolonial culture with the “Western” construction of the very concept of nature itself.

Topic

Donna Haraway’s reimagining of the history of science, gender, and nature through primatology and feminist theory.

Framework

Highlight Noteworthy + Challenge Position

Main Point

Haraway’s Primate Visions radically rethinks the history of science by rejecting traditional, unified narratives and challenging the separation between scientist and subject as well as between science and culture; instead, she argues for a fragmented, multiperspective view that includes cultural forces and nonhuman actors as shapers of knowledge. ()

P1: Introducing Haraway’s Book and its Ambition

Haraway’s Primate Visions is described as a bold, feminist history of science that doesn’t just look at gender, but also brings in race, class, and culture to show how Western views of nature have been shaped. Primatology is chosen as her entry point, since our closeness to primates invites scientists to project human societal beliefs onto them.

P2: Haraway’s Theoretical Challenge to Science

Haraway directly questions the usual idea that scientists are completely separate from the subjects they study. She says seeing nature as something apart from and controlled by people is outdated and problematic. Instead, she thinks both human and nonhuman agents (like primates themselves) help build what we know—and that instead of a single truth, we have many, interconnected partial truths.

P3: Haraway’s Unconventional Writing and Historical Approach

This different way of thinking is matched by her nonlinear, fragmented writing style. Rather than tying everything into one grand narrative about primatology, Haraway keeps separate voices distinct, refusing to force them into a "master story." This patchwork method is rare among historians of science.

18.

Which one of the following best exemplifies the type of "traditional history" mentioned in the last sentence of the third paragraph?

  1. Correct

    a chronological recounting of the

    Why this is right

    "A chronological recounting of MC's life and work" sounds like a master narrative. When you recount someone's life and work chronologically, you tend to tell a story that builds over time. This also has the "Narrative with emphasis on a causal argument" because it's telling her life story with special attention/emphasis on the circumstances that led to her discovery of radium.

    Skill tested: Application · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

    72% picked this

  2. a television series that dramatizes

    Prediction vs. History

    This sounds like it could have a master narrative, but that narrative would take place in a hypothetical future. There's no way we think that "traditional history" told a story about the future. Our common sense tells us that writing history would mean telling a story about the past.

    7% picked this

  3. the transcript of a series

    Bad Match: no narrative

    Stories have a beginning / middle / end. This doesn't sound at all like a narrative story. It just sounds like a transcript of conversations. It's a discussion with no clear takeaways.

    10% picked this

  4. a newspaper editorial written by

    Future vs. Past

    Like (B), this piece of writing is talking about the future: "If we do project X, we'll get practical benefits Y and Z". Writing a persuasive essay about what you hope will happen in the futue does not sound like writing history.

    5% picked this

  5. detailed mathematical notes recording the

    Bad Match: data, not story

    Sort of like (C), this seems to just be a record of data. A transcript in (C), a set of detailed notes in (E). "The precise data gathered from an experiment" is not a master narrative. It's also not a causal argument. It might form the basis for someone to make a causal argument, but the recording of the data itself seems miles away from "telling a story".

    6% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free