Q9

[tamwaiman]

I don't know where the passage asserts (B) ("an important role");
and why (C) is incorrect?
Doesn't it paraphrase what the author describe in L15-18?

Thanks.

[bbirdwell]

(C) is incorrect because the critics do not say that cultures need to be studied from more than one perspective. Their objection is not really about *how many* perspectives need to be utilized -- their objection is simply that studying a culture from within the perspective of the majority culture is not good.

For example, the critics might very well think that studying a culture CAN be successful from only ONE culture's perspective -- just not the majority culture's. See the difference? It's subtle, but there.

That history plays an important role is stated verbatim in line 20, and is the primary premise used to support the main idea of the paragraph: that studies limited to the perspective of majority culture = inadequate. Since it's the premise used to support the main idea, we can certainly infer that the author believes it to be important.

Hope that helps!

[lissethbayona]

I incorrectly picked (A) on this one but I think I understand why it is wrong now. The critics never discuss whether those with different values would be able to understand the social and historical circumstances that gave rise to a culture’s values. Rather, the critics discuss whether they would be able to understand the culture and its value system.

Is this correct?

[ohthatpatrick]

Yes! Expertly expressed.

Let me add to this thread that within the "most likely to agree" / "inferred" / "suggests" / "implies" family of question stems, you can really benefit by having an eye/ear for extreme and comparative wording.

So just glancing at the answers, I see
(A) CANNOT be understood
(B) can plan an important role
(C) IMPOSSIBLE to successfully study
(D) Genuine understanding is IMPOSSIBLE
(E) Values CANNOT be adequately understood

So (B) is by far the weakest, safest claim. But extreme language isn't automatically wrong. It just waves a big red flag that means, "you MUST find something in the passage as strong as this word".

We DO have strong wording in 22-24, saying
Their value systems CANNOT be properly understood IF you only approach them from within the majority culture's perspective.

Wrong answers
(A) "Value systems", not "circumstances", can't be understood.
(C) "impossible to study another culture" vs. "impossible to properly understand their value system". Also, "can't be solely from majority culture's perspective" vs. "must be more than one".
(D) "shares the same cultural values" vs. "approach them from outside the majority culture's perspective"
(E) Wrong paragraph. 3rd paragraph was about methods of Western science.

(B) is not a verbatim paraphrase. "Play an important role" is not used. But it helps to know that within the "most likely to agree" / "inferred" / "suggests" / "implies" family of question stems, your correct answer will almost always be a weird (but safe) rephrasing of what we've read.

Seeing exact wording matches normally suggests TRAP answer.
Seeing weak, wishy-washy, aloof sounding wording normally suggests GOOD answer.

[616272824]

I still confused with d is wrong, can anyone explain?

[ohthatpatrick]

The author isn't saying that you have to share the same cultural values in order to genuinely understand another culture.

The author is saying that if you're trying to genuinely understand another culture, you have to do so using THEIR values, not YOUR values.

I'm an American.

To understand Chilean culture, it's not necessary that American culture shares the same values as Chilean culture. It's necessary that *I* try to understand Chilean culture from the perspective of Chilean values, not American values.