GMAT prep RC

[gasg]

In a new book about the antiparty feeling of the early political leaders of the United States, Ralph Ketcham argues that the first six Presidents differed decisively from later Presidents because the first six held values inherited from the classical humanist tradition of eighteenth-century England. In this view, government was designed not to satisfy the private desires of the people but to make them better citizens; this tradition stressed the disinterested devotion of political leaders to the public good. Justice, wisdom, and courage were more important qualities in a leader than the ability to organize voters and win elections. Indeed, leaders were supposed to be called to office rather than to run for office. And if they took up the burdens of public office with a sense of duty, leaders also believed that such offices were naturally their due because of their social preeminence or their contributions to the country. Given this classical conception of leadership, it is not surprising that the first six Presidents condemned political parties. Parties were partial by definition, self-interested, and therefore serving something other than the transcendent public good.

Even during the first presidency (Washington's), however, the classical conception of virtuous leadership was being undermined by commercial forces that had been gathering since at least the beginning of the eighteenth century. Commerce--its profit-making, its self-interestedness, its individualism--became the enemy of these classical ideals. Although Ketcham does not picture the struggle in quite this way, he does rightly see Jackson's tenure (the seventh presidency) as the culmination of the acceptance of party, commerce, and individualism. For the Jacksonians, nonpartisanship lost its relevance, and under the direction of Van Buren, party gained a new legitimacy. The classical ideals of the first six Presidents became identified with a privileged aristocracy, an aristocracy that had to be overcome in order to allow competition between opposing political interests. Ketcham is so strongly committed to justifying the classical ideals, however, that he underestimates the advantages of their decline. For example, the classical conception of leadership was incompatible with our modern notion of the freedoms of speech and press, freedoms intimately associated with the legitimacy of opposing political parties.

Question
The passage is primarily concerned with

(A) describing and comparing two theories about the early history of the United States
(B) describing and analyzing an argument about the early history of the United States
(C) discussing new evidence that qualifies a theory about the early history of the United States
(D) refuting a theory about political leadership in the United States
(E) resolving an ambiguity in an argument about political leadership in the United States

How you classify this passage- about history of US or political leadership in US

[Adam@Knewton]

Question
The passage is primarily concerned with

(A) describing and comparing two theories about the early history of the United States
(B) describing and analyzing an argument about the early history of the United States
(C) discussing new evidence that qualifies a theory about the early history of the United States
(D) refuting a theory about political leadership in the United States
(E) resolving an ambiguity in an argument about political leadership in the United States

How you classify this passage- about history of US or political leadership in US

The topic of this passage is neither the history of the US nor political leadership in the US; rather, it's Ketcham's book. The passage opens and closes with assessments of Ketcham's thesis, and all the details that are brought to bear are meant to analyze the legtimacy of Ketcham's book, not to analyze American history.

With this in mind, (A) is out because two theories aren't discussed, only one, and (D) is out because we do not refute Ketcham's book, even though at the very end we discuss some oversights in it. The real decision, though, comes down to (in this case, as is often but not always the case in RC) the verbs used in each answer choice:
(A) "describing," yes, "comparing," no.
(B) "describing," yes, "analyzing," yes.
(C) "discussing," yes, but there is "new evidence"; also "qualifying," no ("qualifying" on the GMAT means "explaining that a theory/model/substance doesn't work in all situations and showing which situations it does or doesn't work in").
(D) "refuting," no.
(E) "resolving an ambiguity," no.

[Black Knight]

I go with B and the subject should be 'A review of Ketcham's book'.

What's the OA?

[powerpuff]

I'll also go with option B. Nice explanation by Adam.

[navami]

Hi Adam,

Option B says: Describing and analyzing an argument about the early history of the United States
Isn't the words early history of the United States too general or broad in this case? I mean it is just the early political history of Unites states; how can we refer this as early history of the United States

[Adam@Knewton]

Hi Adam,

Option B says: Describing and analyzing an argument about the early history of the United States
Isn't the words early history of the United States too general or broad in this case? I mean it is just the early political history of Unites states; how can we refer this as early history of the United States

Navami;

This is one of those if-it's-not-wrong,-it's-right moments on the GMAT. Yes, "early political history" would have been better. However, instead of asking yourself what's ideal, ask yourself whether or not the language of the answer choice could possibly be an accurate description of the passage. Is it about the US? check. Is it about history? check. Early history? check. That's enough to make this at least a possible answer choice.

It's important know when to be nit-picky and when not to be. When referring to specific details, an answer choice must match exactly what's in the passage; when referring to the author's tone or scope, they will always use different words than you see in the passage, so expect a little bit (just a little bit) of a gap in translation with very similar meanings, like here. Similarly, on Critical Reasoning, certain common-sense word replacements are okay (such as, an answer choice that says "newspapers, magazines, and television" when the original stimulus only referred to "the media"), but any change in the logic of an answer choice should cause you to nit-pick away at an answer.

When it comes to situations like this, as long as the wording of the answer choice doesn't contain any "killer words" to eliminate it, it's at least possible. If nothing in an answer choice is wrong, it must be right! Sorry for how annoying that is, but it's a good explanation to keep in mind

[HSPA]

Topic: antiparty by first six

First para:
first six Mr.P their
'thought inheritance'
'their qualites'
'no- private desire yes-public good'
Conclusion: first six condemmed political parties/parties are bad

Para two:
First P/may be all were hit by commercial forces.
qualites of commerce
book says P is not undermined by commmerce
New P the seventh did struggled with commerce
book justifies first six P ideals/book is bad at adv of first 6 decline
POV-- dis-adv of class concept "speech and press"
conclusion : book is bad in modern era

Q) Opinion: Passage is concenred with a book about first six P's classical conception/commerce/P.parites/modern era's classic concept view

a) only one theory is compared in old to modern era (classic concepts)
B) 1st para did a lot on this, 2nd para on the seventh rule and commerce
c) I did not find any evidence here [ what did I missed in 2nd para]
d) 1st para encouraged classical and 2nd para says modern era need new concepts
e) No ambiguity found

[nasheen]

According to the passage,the author and ketchman agree on which of the following points.
A)The first six presidents held the same ideas about political parties as later president did in the United States

E)Widespread acceptance of political parties occured during Andrew Jackson's presidency?

I have chosen option 'E' because of below bold line,but correct option is 'A'
Why option 'A' is correct?

Although Ketcham does not picture the struggle in quite this way, he does rightly see Jackson's tenure (the seventh presidency) as the culmination of the acceptance of party, commerce, and individualism

[gmattesttaker2]

Hello,

For the following question from this same passage can you please tell me how to arrive at the correct answer:

The author of the passage would be most likely to agree with which of the following statements about Ketcham?

A) He overemphasizes the influence of classical ideals on the first six Presidents of the Untied States.

B) He fails to recognize that classical ideals had little influence on politics in the United States.

C) He does not pay adequate attention to the negative aspects of the first six President's commitment to the classical ideals.

D) He inaccurately suggests that classical ideals gave rise to our modern notion of democracy.

E) He underestimates the effect of ideologies other than the humanist tradition of the first six Presidents.

OA: C


Thanks for your help,
Sri

[The Lost Spaniard]

To whom ever is reading this post,

Could I get some help on another question from the same RC passage?

It can be inferred that the author of the passage would be most likely to agree that modern views of freedoms of speech and press are:
a)values closely associated with the beliefs of the aristocracy of the early United States
b)political rights less compatible with democracy and individualism than with classical ideals
c)political rights uninfluenced by the formation of opposing political parties
d)values not inherent in the classical humanist tradition of eighteenth-century England
e)values whose interpretation would have been agreed on by all United States Presidents

I was thinking D but backed out and chose C.

[gmat_for_life]

Can anybody explain the correct answer to the below question?

It can be inferred that the author of the passage would be most likely to agree that modern views of the freedoms of speech and press are
(A) values closely associated with the beliefs of the aristocracy of the early United States
(B) political rights less compatible with democracy and individualism than with classical ideals
(C) political rights uninfluenced by the formation of opposing political parties
(D) values not inherent in the classical humanist tradition of eighteenth-century England
(E) values whose interpretation would have been agreed on by all United States Presidents

The OA is D.

[Jimit09]

Refer to last 2 sentences of the passage which states that :-
"The classical ideals of the first six Presidents became identified with a privileged aristocracy, an aristocracy that had to be overcome in order to allow competition between opposing political interests. Ketcham is so strongly committed to justifying the classical ideals, however, that he underestimates the advantages of their decline. For example, the classical conception of leadership was incompatible with our modern notion of the freedoms of speech and press, freedoms intimately associated with the legitimacy of opposing political parties."

Here the author states Ketcham fails to understands the benefits of the downfall of classical ideals and gives an example "modern notion of the freedoms of speech and press, freedoms intimately associated with the legitimacy of opposing political parties" to support his point.



Thank if you find the post or explanation helpful