RC Question 24 Explanation
DISCUSSION: The three positions are the idealists (lines 3-4), the radicals (lines 5-9) and Dostoyevsky. The idealists are never mentioned again (In fact, I had to make up the name “idealists” to refer to them). The rest of the passage describes Dostoyevsky’s criticisms of the radicals.
___________
- This isn’t true. The critics from lines 3-4 are never mentioned again; I’d hardly say we know them in much detail.
- This has the same problem as A. The idealists from lines 3-4 are never mentioned again, so we can hardly say the passage compared them to Dostoyevsky.
- CORRECT. Dostoyevsky’s view is the third position. Paragraphs 2-4 describe Dostoyevsky’s disagreements with the realists (the second position).
- There are two problems. First, the author never compares Dostoyevsky’s views with those of the idealists from lines 3-4. Second, the author never explicitly says whether he agrees Dostoyevsky was right and the realists were wrong.
- The author spends the entire passage telling us about Dostoyevsky’s criticisms of the realists (the second position). We can suspect the author agrees with Dostoyevsky and not the realists. There’s certainly no evidence for the opposite conclusion.
Hi Graeme – I don’t follow your explanation on this question, it seems to me that there are 3 positions, one in each paragraph (in detail) that also reveal Dostoyevsky’s response. While the critics from lines 3-4 are never mentioned, the organization of the material is still structured in such a way to present the radical views. (LSAT 64, Reading Comprehension, Q24)
Paragraph 2 = Position on reality
Paragraph 3 = Position on political view
Paragraph 4 = Position on usefulness
Could you help provide more clarity? Sorry, I’m scratching my head on this one. Also, I’ll take the opportunity to say that your website is an absolute life saver and I’m extremely grateful! Thank you so much.
I agree! I guess maybe usefulness might be intertwined with politcal view? Still, I feel like this one was tricky. I can’t say that even if I had the RC skills I would not pick answer A even though I can kind of understand why answer C was correct
I see where you’re coming from, but this is where it’s important to recognize what counts as a distinct position versus what is just a further elaboration of an existing one.
The first two positions: (1) art as separate from everyday life (what Graeme categorized as idealist) and (2) art as a tool for social change (radical) are clearly defined as opposing schools of thought. The rest of the passage is focused on Dostoyevsky’s critique of the radical position. So we have 3 categories: idealists, radical, and Dostoyevsky.
His views on political purpose and usefulness are discussed in separate paragraphs, but both of these critiques are just topics on ONE position (Dostoyvesky) aimed as a critique to ONE group (radicals). They’re not standalone positions. He’s dismantling different aspects of the same radical viewpoint.
That’s why C is correct: the passage introduces 3 positions, but the primary distinction is made between Dostoyevsky and the radicals. In essence, the political view and the usefulness debate are just components of Dostoyevsky’s broader critique of the radicals, rather than separate perspectives competing with each other.
Hope that helps clarify! Let me know if you have any other questions.