PT153 S4 P4 Q22 ExplanationGrand Theories

Answer choices, explained

1. A

   Wrong Emphasis: lacks author's view7% picked this

   Social historians argue that grand theories, though serviceable in the nineteenth century, are inadequate given the

   The main clause of this answer is, "Social historians argue that grand theories are inadequate". They do, but this answer is just a factual description of what other people say. If our author said something himself, then the main point should be his sentiment, not other people's.

   7%
2. B

   Wrong Emphasis: lacks view on New3% picked this

   Grand theories were too deterministic and so failed to adequately explain even the era in

   This answer is expressed as though it's coming from the author's mind, so this is better than (A). Our author does think that grand theories were too deterministic. She doesn't say they failed to adequately explain the era of their time. She says, "As history has progressed [past the era in which they were developed], they have been revealed as products of their era, possessing inherent explanatory limitations". In other words, she thinks that they were pretty good at explaining phenomena that preceded them, but not good at accounting for everything that came after. More importantly, this answer lacks the author's view on the New, which is covered in the final paragraph. We'd expect to hear something like, "grand theories have been debunked, and that's a good thing, probably, because what we need is a new historical perspective that embraces contigency".

   3%
3. C

   Out of Scope: universal truths5% picked this

   Though seductive in their logic and coherence, grand theories not only led to political injustice but also failed to

   Most of this answer is saying true sentiments the author would probably endorse. But the author never said that grand theories failed to account for certain universal truths. Rather, grand theories purported to be universal truths themselves. The modern era of history has shown that these grand theories are not universal truths (and suggest that history does not proceed by any universal, deterministic rules). That's very different from saying that there are universal truths out there and grand theories just misdescribed them.

   5%
4. D

   Correct80% picked this

   The decline of grand theories illustrates the futility of viewing history as fully determined and the importance of recognizing

   Why this is right

   This answer is very 3rd-paragraph heavy in its content, but that's where the author presented her assessment of the New world we're living in, so it makes sense for those ideas to get top billing. Her assessment? But perhaps this discomfort [of no longer having the cognitive satisfaction of grand theories] is no bad thing, for it might finally persuade us to relinquish the vain the hope for inevitability and hence restore us to the contemplation of historical contingency. Within this Most Valuable Sentence, we see most of the wording in this answer choice. Relinquishing a vain hope for inevitability = "the futility of viewing history as predetermined". The final sentence of the passage also uses language that connects with this answer. The author is saying that the decline of grand theories may allow for the possibility of us pursuing historical explanation without viewing history as fully determined.

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

   80%
5. E

   Out of Scope: universal truths5% picked this

   Though grand theories neglected to account for universal truths, they at least

   Just like (C), this answer is poisoned by the fact that the author never said that grand theories failed to account for certain universal truths. The author doesn't think that there are universal truths. Grand theories failed to account for developments of the 20th and 21st centuries. Grand theories purported to be universal truths themselves. And the modern era of history has shown that these grand theories are not universal truths (and suggest that history does not proceed by any universal, deterministic rules).

   5%