DISCUSSION: The first paragraph explains why the author is studying Tucker. The rest of the passage justifies the author’s methods.
- This is an incredibly vague answer. The author is making a study of Tucker. He doesn’t have a grand plan to correct intellectual traditions.
- Oral testimony isn’t an alternative method of historical investigation. It’s implied that other scholars have used it (lines 35-36).
- The author hasn’t told us what’s in his biography of Tucker. He’s only mentioned why it’s important, and how he gathered evidence.
- Lines 1-3 say that Tucker hasn’t really been studied. So there are no previously held historical views to revise.
- CORRECT. The first paragraph explains the author’s subject matter. The other paragraphs justify his use of oral testimony.
Want a free Reading Comp lesson?
Get a free sample of the Reading Comprehension Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving RC questions