2012 PSAT/NMSQT Practice Test Explanations - Section 1

2012 PSAT/NMSQT Answer Explanations

2012 The College Board. All Rights Reserved

Critical Reading: Section 1

Critical Reading Question 1

Choice (C) is correct. The structure of the sentence indicates that the second part of the sentence relates to Rands being indefatigable, or tireless or incapable of being fatigued. If Rands can function well on very little sleeponly four hourshe certainly would seem to be incapable of being fatigued. Choice (A) is incorrect. The structure of the sentence indicates that the second part of the sentence relates to Rands being indefatigable, or tireless or incapable of being fatigued. It does not make sense to say that Rands seems to be tireless because he can make do with very little performance time, or time spent performing (his works, presumably). Rather, it makes sense to say that he appears indefatigable because he functions on very little sleep. Choice (B) is incorrect. The structure of the sentence indicates that the second part of the sentence relates to Rands being indefatigable, or tireless or incapable of being fatigued. It does not make sense to imply that Rands seems to be tireless because he can make do with very little practice time, or time spent practicing (his works, presumably). Rather, it makes sense to say that he appears indefatigable because he functions on very little sleep. Choice (D) is incorrect. The structure of the sentence indicates that the second part of the sentence relates to Rands being indefatigable, or tireless or incapable of being fatigued. It does not make sense to imply that Rands seems tireless because he can make do with very little exercise time; further, four hours might be considered a lot of time to spend exercising. It makes more sense to say that Rands appears indefatigable because he functions on very little sleep. Choice (E) is incorrect. The structure of the sentence indicates that the second part of the

sentence relates to Rands being indefatigable, or tireless or incapable of being fatigued. It does

not make sense to say that Rands seems tireless because he spends only four hours being

exhausted. In fact, if Rands appears incapable of being fatigued, he would never seem to be

exhausted.


Choice (C) is correct. Generous means willing to give or share freely. To be unselfish is to be generous and not selfish. The structure of the sentence indicates that the part of the sentence after the comma elaborates on or explains the first part. If the Dutts always act unselfishly, or generously, they certainly would be described as wonderfully generous. Choice (A) is incorrect. In this context, dedicated means committed to a cause. Feebly means weakly or without strength. The structure of the sentence indicates that the part of the sentence after the comma elaborates on or explains the first part. If the Dutts are weak in their efforts to promote the well-being of others, it is very unlikely that they would be described as wonderfully dedicated. People who are very dedicated to a cause probably would act vigorously to promote that cause. Choice (B) is incorrect. Menacing means threatening. Promptly means readily or quickly. The structure of the sentence indicates that the part of the sentence after the comma elaborates on or explains the first part. The term promptly might fit the second blank; the Dutts might act quickly to promote the well-being of others. However, there is no reason to suggest that people who work to promote others well-being would be described as wonderfully menacing, or very threatening.



Choice (D) is incorrect. Cautious means careful and tentative. Powerfully means with great power or influence. The structure of the sentence indicates that the part of the sentence after the comma elaborates on or explains the first part. The term powerfully might fit the second blank; the Dutts might be influential and might use their influence to help others. However, it is unlikely that people who act powerfully would be described as wonderfully cautious, or very careful and tentative. Choice (E) is incorrect. Courteous means kindly or well-mannered. To be cruel is to inflict pain

or suffering. The structure of the sentence indicates that the part of the sentence after the comma

elaborates on or explains the first part. The Dutts could be wonderfully courteous, or very kindly.

However, kindly people certainly would not act cruelly to promote the well-being of others.

Indeed, it is illogical to suggest that people would inflict pain or suffering to help others.


Choice (A) is correct. Supporters are people who support or adhere to something. In this context, critics are people who harshly judge something. The sentence sets up a contrast: some people hail, or enthusiastically approve of, the new legislative initiative because they think it will solve a problem, while other people argue that it will not be effective in a meaningful way. The terms supporters and critics logically complete the sentence because people who support the initiative would be expected to approve of it and people who harshly judge the initiative would be expected to argue against it. Choice (B) is incorrect. Advocates are people that support or promote something. Proponents are people who argue in favor of it. The sentence sets up a contrast: some people hail, or enthusiastically approve of, the new legislative initiative because they think it will solve a problem, while other people argue that it will not be effective in a meaningful way. The terms advocates and proponents do not support the necessary contrast because both terms describe people who are in favor of something. Further, proponents of the initiativepeople who are in favor of the initiativecertainly would not argue that the initiative will produce no meaningful results. Choice (C) is incorrect. Detractors are people who belittle or speak ill of something. Antagonists are people who oppose something. The sentence sets up a contrast: some people hail, or enthusiastically approve of, the new legislative initiative because they think it will solve a problem, while other people argue that it will not be effective in a meaningful way. The terms detractors and antagonists do not support the necessary contrast because both terms describe people who are against something. Further, detractors of the initiative certainly would not enthusiastically approve of it. Choice (D) is incorrect. Adversaries are people who oppose or resist something. Observers are people who watch but do not participate in something. The sentence sets up a contrast: some people hail, or enthusiastically approve of, the new legislative initiative because they think it will solve a problem, while other people argue that it will not be effective in a meaningful way. The terms adversaries and observers do not support the necessary contrast; observers might oppose the new initiative even if they do not participate in resisting it or preventing it. Further, adversaries of the initiative certainly would not enthusiastically approve of it. Choice (E) is incorrect. In this context, auditors are listeners or observers. Creditors are

people to whom a debt is owed. The sentence sets up a contrast: some people hail, or

enthusiastically approve of, the new legislative initiative because they think it will solve a

problem, while other people argue that it will not be effective in a meaningful way. The terms

auditors and creditors do not support the necessary contrast; indeed, there is no direct

connection between listeners and people to whom a debt is owed. Further, because the sentence



does not indicate what the initiative has to do with, there is no reason to assume that auditors

would approve of it and creditors would disapprove of it.


Choice (A) is correct. In this context, recognition is formal acknowledgement. Groundbreaking means markedly innovative. The sentence indicates that Dr. Ho was honored by Time magazine and that he worked with innovative drug therapies. To be named Man of the Year is to receive formal acknowledgement of ones achievements, so the term recognition fits the first blank. And because Dr. Ho worked with innovative theories, it makes sense to describe his work as groundbreaking. Choice (B) is incorrect. The sentence indicates that Dr. Ho was honored by Time magazine and that he worked with innovative drug therapies. There is no reason to suggest that the work of a doctor whose innovative drug therapies have been pivotal, or vitally important, and given hope to many patients would need to be defended from anything. Further, it is not clear how Time magazine would be offering a defense for Dr. Hos work by naming Dr. Ho Man of the Year. Choice (C) is incorrect. Appreciation is admiration, approval, or gratitude. Nave means simplistic or uninformed. The sentence indicates that Dr. Ho was honored by Time magazine and that he worked with innovative drug therapies. The title Man of the Year is often given as a sign of admiration and approval, so the term appreciation might fit the first blank. However, the term nave does not logically complete the sentence. It is unlikely that a doctor would receive an honor in appreciation of simplistic or uninformed scientific work. Choice (D) is incorrect. The sentence indicates that Dr. Ho was honored by Time magazine and that he worked with innovative drug therapies. There is no reason to suggest that the work of a doctor whose innovative drug therapies have been monumental, or of outstanding significance, would need to be protected from anything. Further, it is not clear how Time magazine would be offering protection for Dr. Hos work by naming Dr. Ho Man of the Year. Choice (E) is incorrect. In this context, acknowledgement is recognition of an act or

achievement. Intangible means imperceptible or lacking substance. The sentence indicates that

Dr. Ho was honored by Time magazine and that he worked with innovative drug therapies. To

be named Man of the Year is to be recognized for ones achievements, so the term

acknowledgment fits the first blank. However, the term intangible does not logically complete

the sentence. It is unlikely that a doctor would receive an honor in recognition of work that lacks

substance or has not made a perceptible difference.


Choice (C) is correct. Commendable means worthy of confidence or notice. To be an exemplary model is to be deserving of imitation or to serve as a pattern. The sentence makes it clear that Frank and Susan served as a certain type of model as a result of their behavior. Because Frank and Susan provided excellent care for the children, it makes sense to say that their behavior was commendable. Further, people who behave commendably likely would be considered exemplary models for othersthat is, they would be seen as people whose behavior should be imitated. Choice (A) is incorrect. Incorruptible means highly moral and incapable of being corrupted. Pernicious means highly destructive or even deadly. The sentence makes it clear that Frank and Susan served as a certain type of model as a result of their behavior. Frank and Susan might behave in a highly moral way, so the term incorruptible might fit the first blank. However,



the term pernicious does not logically complete the sentence. It is illogical to suggest that highly moral people who provided excellent care for children would be described as dangerous or deadly models. Choice (B) is incorrect. Lamentable means deplorable or deserving contempt. Flawed means imperfect or weak. The sentence makes it clear that Frank and Susan served as a certain type of model as a result of their behavior. People who behave in a deplorable way likely would be considered imperfect models for children. However, the sentence indicates that Frank and Susan took excellent care of the children; therefore, it is illogical to suggest that Frank and Susans behavior was lamentable and that Frank and Susan were flawed models. Choice (D) is incorrect. Erratic means inconsistent and unpredictable. Unimpeachable means reliable beyond a doubt. The sentence makes it clear that Frank and Susan served as a certain type of model as a result of their behavior. It is illogical to suggest that Frank and Susan would be considered unimpeachable models for the children as a result of behaving inconsistently and unpredictably; people who behave erratically would not be considered reliable beyond a doubt. Choice (E) is incorrect. Reputable means of good reputation or held in esteem. Imperfect

means not perfect or even defective. The sentence makes it clear that Frank and Susan served

as a certain type of model as a result of their behavior. Frank and Susan might have a good

reputation because of their behaviorespecially if they took excellent care of the childrenso

the term reputable might fit the first blank. However, the term imperfect does not logically

complete the sentence. If Frank and Susan are reputable and have taken very good care of the

children, there is no reason to suggest that they would be imperfect or defective models.


Choice (D) is correct. In this context, profound means having intellectual depth. The structure of the sentence indicates that the part of the sentence after the comma comments on the first part. Because Eliot is described as undermining superficial positions in the quest for moral truth, it makes sense to say that Eliots fiction demonstrated profound ethical inquiry. In other words, Eliots fiction contained intellectually deep examination that undercut superficial, or shallow, points. Choice (A) is incorrect. Facile means shallow or simplistic. The structure of the sentence indicates that the part of the sentence after the comma comments on the first part. Because Eliot is described as undermining superficial positionsthat is, undercutting or weakening superficial or shallow pointsit does not make sense to say that Eliots fiction demonstrated facile ethical inquiry, or contained shallow or simplistic examinations. Choice (B) is incorrect. In this context, affected means feigned or false. The structure of the sentence indicates that the part of the sentence after the comma comments on the first part. It does not make much sense to say that Eliots fiction demonstrated affected ethical inquiry because it undermine[d] superficial positions in the quest for moral truth. Work that successfully undermined, or undercut, shallow points would likely involve genuine questions. Further, it is not clear how Eliot could have affected ethical inquiry, or somehow only pretended to examine ethical issues. Choice (C) is incorrect. Inadequate means insufficient. The structure of the sentence indicates that the part of the sentence after the comma comments on the first part. It does not make much sense to say that Eliots fiction demonstrated inadequate ethical inquiry because it undermine[d] superficial positions in the quest for moral truth. Work that successfully undermined, or undercut, shallow points would likely involve rigorous examination of ethical issues, not inadequate or insufficient examination.



Choice (E) is incorrect. Impulsive means hasty and without forethought. The structure of the

sentence indicates that the part of the sentence after the comma comments on the first part. It

does not make much sense to say that Eliots fiction demonstrated impulsive ethical inquiry

because it undermine[d] superficial positions in the quest for moral truth. Work that successfully

undermined, or undercut, shallow points would likely involve thoughtful and rigorous examination

of ethical issues, not hastily conceived examination that is not thought out.


Choice (D) is correct. The terms that fit the blanks must describe Esmereldas conflicting feelings; therefore, the terms that fit the blank must conflict with one another. The term foreboding refers to a feeling that evil or trouble is approaching; the term elation refers to intense joy. These terms do conflict with one another. Further, it makes sense to say that Esmerelda felt troubled about leaving the security of the village but also joyful about moving to a city full of excitement. Choice (A) is incorrect. The terms that fit the blanks must describe Esmereldas conflicting feelings; therefore, the terms that fit the blank must conflict with one another. The term boredom refers to feeling weary and disinterested; the term impassivity refers to feeling no emotion. These terms do not logically complete the sentence because they do not necessarily conflict with one another; in fact, boredom and impassivity are somewhat synonymous. Further, it is unlikely that Esmerelda would have felt bored as a result of moving to the excitement of the city. Choice (B) is incorrect. The terms that fit the blanks must describe Esmereldas conflicting feelings; therefore, the terms that fit the blank must conflict with one another. The term eagerness refers to enthusiastic interest; the term optimism refers to a tendency to expect the best possible outcome. These terms do not logically complete the sentence because they do not necessarily conflict with one another; indeed, someone who is eager might also be optimistic. Choice (C) is incorrect. The terms that fit the blanks must describe Esmereldas conflicting feelings; therefore, the terms that fit the blank must conflict with one another. The term satisfaction refers to a feeling of fulfillment and contentment; the term delight refers to great satisfaction or joy. These terms do not logically complete the sentence because they do not conflict with one another; in fact, they describe different levels of the same feeling. Choice (E) is incorrect. The terms that fit the blanks must describe Esmereldas conflicting

feelings; therefore, the terms that fit the blank must conflict with one another. The term

subjugation refers to feeling controlled or conquered; the term anger refers to strong

displeasure. These terms do not logically complete the sentence because they do not necessarily

conflict with one another; indeed, someone who feels conquered might also feel angry.


Choice (B) is correct. Placid means calm and serene. The structure of the sentence indicates that the part of the sentence following the colon will modify or elaborate on the first part. The idea that the woman shrugged off, or minimized and ignored, things that others would consider calamities, or disasters, elaborates on the idea that the woman possessed a remarkably placid disposition, or tended to be very calm and serene. Choice (A) is incorrect. Enigmatic means mysterious. The structure of the sentence indicates that the part of the sentence following the colon will modify or elaborate on the first part. The idea that the woman shrugged off, or minimized and ignored, things that others would consider



disasters does not elaborate on the idea that the woman possessed a remarkably enigmatic disposition. There is no direct connection between ignoring certain things and being mysterious. Choice (C) is incorrect. Humane means compassionate and sympathetic. The structure of the sentence indicates that the part of the sentence following the colon will modify or elaborate on the first part. The idea that the woman shrugged off, or minimized and ignored, things that others would consider disasters does not elaborate on the idea that the woman possessed a remarkably humane disposition. Someone who is compassionate might ignore certain things, but there is no direct connection between shrugging things off and being humane. Choice (D) is incorrect. Diffident means hesitant and lacking self-confidence. The structure of the sentence indicates that the part of the sentence following the colon will modify or elaborate on the first part. The idea that the woman shrugged off, or minimized and ignored, things that others would consider disasters does not elaborate on the idea that the woman possessed a remarkably diffident disposition. There is no direct connection between ignoring certain things and being diffident; one could lack self-confidence and still shrug off things that would bother others. Choice (E) is incorrect. Ingenuous means innocent and not devious. The structure of the

sentence indicates that the part of the sentence following the colon will modify or elaborate on the

first part. The idea that the woman shrugged off, or minimized and ignored, things that others

would consider disasters does not elaborate on the idea that the woman possessed a

remarkably ingenuous disposition. There is no direct connection between ignoring certain things

and being ingenuous; one who is innocent could shrug off things that would bother others.


Choice (D) is correct. In lines 1-2, the author states, Every now and again, cosmologists decide that the universe needs redecorating. The author is comparing the way cosmologists reorder their conceptions of the universe to the way someone might redecorate or renovate a home. The terms declutter, embellish, and fixingterms that often have to do with home renovation or interior decorationall expand on the idea that cosmologists redecorate the universe. In lines 8-12, the author makes the comparison explicit: Like the decorator who strips away wallpaper . . . cosmologists are realizing that their discovery . . . points to serious problems with their models. Choice (A) is incorrect. The terms declutter, embellish, and fixing do not establish a tone of breezy disdain, or nonchalant scorn; indeed, nothing in the passage suggests that the author is scornful of cosmologists changing conceptions of the universe. Instead, these terms expand upon an earlier figure of speech. The termsall of which often have to do with home renovation or interior decorationrelate to the authors comparison of cosmologists to someone who is redecorating a home. Choice (B) is incorrect. The terms declutter, embellish, and fixing do not emphasize the complexity of an issue. In fact, the author uses these terms in an effort to make an issue easier to understand; he or she compares the way cosmologists reorder their conceptions of the universe to the way someone might redecorate or renovate a home. The quoted terms often have to do with home renovation or interior decoration, and the author uses them in order to expand on his or her comparison of cosmologists to someone who is redecorating. Choice (C) is incorrect. The terms declutter, embellish, and fixing are not used to vary the terms of a critique; indeed, nothing in the passage suggests that the author is critiquing, or examining critically, cosmologists changing conceptions of the universe. Further, the terms are not varied; they are all terms that often have to do with home renovation or interior decoration. The author uses the quoted terms in order to expand on his or her comparison of the way



cosmologists reorder their conceptions of the universe to the way someone might redecorate a home. Choice (E) is incorrect. The terms declutter, embellish, and fixing are not used to explain the

details of a technical theory; indeed, the author is not trying to provide a technical explanation of

the details of cosmologists changing conceptions of the universe. Rather, the author is trying to

present cosmologists changing conceptions in a way that is accessible for non-scientists. He or

she compares the way cosmologists reorder their conceptions of the universe to the way

someone might redecorate a home; the quoted terms, all of which have to do with home

renovation or interior decoration, expand on the authors comparison.


Choice (E) is correct. Throughout the passage, the author compares cosmologists practice of revising our understanding of the universe in light of new scientific discoveries to redecorating. The author maintains the metaphor into the last sentence: When theyre done fixing things, chances are well hardly recognize the place. The author is referring to the fact that cosmologists are at it again, once again doing research that will redecorate the universe. The last sentence of the passage implies that this current research will transform our understanding of the universeit will change our understanding so much that well hardly recognize the universe. Choice (A) is incorrect. Throughout the passage, the author compares cosmologists practice of revising our understanding of the universe in light of new scientific discoveries to redecorating. The author maintains the metaphor into the last sentence: When theyre done fixing things, chances are well hardly recognize the place. The author is not implying that cosmologists recent views of the cosmos are aesthetically satisfying, or pleasing in appearance; indeed, it is somewhat odd to speak of scientific theories in terms of their beauty rather than their scientific attributes. Instead, the author is implying that cosmologists current research will greatly transform our understanding of the universeit will change our understanding so much that well hardly recognize the universe. Choice (B) is incorrect. Throughout the passage, the author compares cosmologists practice of revising our understanding of the universe in light of new scientific discoveries to redecorating. The author maintains the metaphor into the last sentence: When theyre done fixing things, chances are well hardly recognize the place. The author is not implying that current cosmological methods can be bewilderingly complex. He or she is not saying that well hardly recognize the new universe because it will be too difficult to understand, but rather that we will simply see the universe very differently because new research will so transform our current understanding. Choice (C) is incorrect. Throughout the passage, the author compares cosmologists practice of revising our understanding of the universe in light of new scientific discoveries to redecorating. The author maintains the metaphor into the last sentence: When theyre done fixing things, chances are well hardly recognize the place. The author is not indicating that cosmologists currently doing research will damage previous theoretical models of the universe, or that they will harm anything. Indeed, he or she suggests that cosmologists today are doing what cosmologists have always done: revising and correcting their understanding of the universe based on new information and discoveries. Choice (D) is incorrect. Throughout the passage, the author compares cosmologists practice of

revising our understanding of the universe in light of new scientific discoveries to redecorating.

The author maintains the metaphor into the last sentence: When theyre done fixing things,

chances are well hardly recognize the place. The author is not implying that contemporary

astronomical theories will be thoroughly tested by the scientific community. He or she is not



talking about how other scientists will treat new theories when they are revealed, but rather about

how wethe public, it seemswill have a new view of the universe as a result of current

research.


Choice (A) is correct. In line 5, the author indicates that Charles Chesnutt, a writer, earned immediate accolades for his workthat is, he earned praise for his work right away. The author goes on to state that Chesnutt earned praise for creating fresh, vivid, dramatic sketches in a new and delightful vein. It is reasonable to assume that these quotations are examples of the praise Chesnutt received from his contemporaries, or people who were living at the same time, as soon as they read his work. Choice (B) is incorrect. In line 5, the author indicates that Chesnutt earned immediate accolades for his workthat is, he earned praise for his work right away. The author goes on to state that Chesnutt earned praise for creating fresh, vivid, dramatic sketches in a new and delightful vein. These quotations are not examples of Chesnutts pronouncements about the purpose of fiction writing. It is clear that the quoted statements were not made by Chesnutt, but rather by others who had read his work. They are examples of the praise Chesnutt received. Choice (C) is incorrect. In line 5, the author indicates that Chesnutt earned immediate accolades for his workthat is, he earned praise for his work right away. The author goes on to state that Chesnutt earned praise for creating fresh, vivid, dramatic sketches in a new and delightful vein. These quotations are not examples of the type of language that appears in Chesnutts stories. It is clear that the quoted statements were not spoken or written by Chesnutt, but rather were made by others who had read his work. They are examples of the praise Chesnutt received. Choice (D) is incorrect. In line 5, the author indicates that Chesnutt, a nineteenth-century writer, earned immediate accolades for his workthat is, he earned praise for his work right away. The author goes on to state that Chesnutt earned praise for creating fresh, vivid, dramatic sketches in a new and delightful vein. These quotations are not examples of the shared language of nineteenth-century short-story writers. It is clear that the statements were made by people who had read Chesnutts work; there is no indication that these people were also writers or that Chesnutt would have phrased things the same way they did. Choice (E) is incorrect. In line 5, the author indicates that Chesnutt, a nineteenth-century writer,

earned immediate accolades for his workthat is, he earned praise for his work right away. The

author goes on to state that Chesnutt earned praise for creating fresh, vivid, dramatic sketches

in a new and delightful vein. These quotations are not examples of the unintelligible jargon, or

impossible to understand language, of modern-day literary critics. It is clear that the statements

were made by people who were living at the same time as Chesnutt, not by modern critics. The

quotes are examples of the immediate praise Chesnutts work receivedin the 1800s.


Choice (D) is correct. The description in these lines employs a simile: Chesnutts writing portrayed human loss and torment . . . with a wit like an ax cutting into a tree in the backwoods of the North Carolina he knew so well. Because an ax penetrates a tree trunk with considerable force, this figure of speech suggests that many of Chesnutts stories are both forceful and penetrating in their insights. Choice (A) is incorrect. In lines 9-12 the author states that Chesnutts writing portrayed human loss and torment . . . with a wit like an ax cutting into a tree in the backwoods of the North Carolina he knew so well. Bret Harte is mentioned earlier in the passage, but these lines are



focused specifically on Chesnutts portrayal of human emotions; the author is not comparing Chesnutt to Harte or suggesting that Chesnutts stories are more realistic than Hartes. Choice (B) is incorrect. In lines 9-12 the author states that Chesnutts writing portrayed human loss and torment . . . with a wit like an ax cutting into a tree in the backwoods of the North Carolina he knew so well. Although these lines refer to Chesnutts home (North Carolina), the description does not suggest that many of Chesnutts stories evoke a warm and sentimental response. The author is not indicating that Chesnutt wrote sentimental stories about his home; rather, he or she is describing Chesnutts ability to portray loss and tormenthuman experiences that are neither warm nor sentimental. Choice (C) is incorrect. In lines 9-12 the author states that Chesnutts writing portrayed human loss and torment . . . with a wit like an ax cutting into a tree in the backwoods of the North Carolina he knew so well. Earlier in the passage the author indicates that Chesnutt was one of the first African American writers; however, nowhere in the passage does the author indicate that Chesnutt influenced other writers. The description in lines 9-12 does not suggest that Chesnutt influenced the writings of other African American authors. Choice (E) is incorrect. In lines 9-12 the author states that Chesnutts writing portrayed human

loss and torment . . . with a wit like an ax cutting into a tree in the backwoods of the North

Carolina he knew so well. Although the author mentions the North Carolina wilderness, he or she

only does so in order to make the comparison between Chesnutts insights and an ax cutting into

a tree more colorful. Chesnutts descriptions of things may have been vivid, but there is no

indication that he actually wrote about North Carolina or life in the North Carolina wilderness in

his stories.


Choice (A) is correct. The statement in lines 5-7 of Passage 1 summarizes the view that that the

body and its parts are physical matter while the mind is not. The author of Passage 2 indicates

that advances in molecular biology and neuroscience tell us that every process that is used in

the development of the body is also used in the development of the brain and that The initial

structure of the mind . . . is a product of our genes. The author of Passage 2, then, would most

likely agree that the view described in Passage 1 has been undermined by recent discoveries in

molecular biology. He or she believes in the evidence indicating that our brains are just a bunch

of molecules, grown in all the usual ways.

Choice (B) is incorrect. The statement in lines 5-7 of Passage 1 summarizes the view that that

the body and its parts are physical matter while the mind is not. The author of Passage 2

indicates that advances in molecular biology and neuroscience tell us that every process that is

used in the development of the body is also used in the development of the brain and that The

initial structure of the mind . . . is a product of our genes. The author of Passage 2, then, would

not agree that the view described in Passage 1 has been strengthened by modern ideas about

humans place in the universe. The author of Passage 2 would say that the view has been

weakened in the recent past, not that it has been strengthened at all.

Choice (C) is incorrect. The statement in lines 5-7 of Passage 1 summarizes the view that that




initial structure of the mind . . . is a product of our genes. The author of Passage 2, then,



probably would not agree that the view described in Passage 1 is supported by cognitive

neuroscientists; indeed, he or she suggests that advances in . . . neuroscience have contributed

to an opposing view.

Choice (D) is incorrect. The statement in lines 5-7 of Passage 1 summarizes the view that that the body and its parts are physical matter while the mind is not. The author of Passage 2 indicates that advances in molecular biology and neuroscience tell us that every process that is used in the development of the body is also used in the development of the brain and that The initial structure of the mind . . . is a product of our genes. There is no reason to believe the author of Passage 2 would agree that the view described in Passage 1 is promoted by contemporary philosophers; this author makes no mention of contemporary philosophers. Choice (E) is incorrect. The statement in lines 5-7 of Passage 1 summarizes the view that that




initial structure of the mind . . . is a product of our genes. The author of Passage 2 probably

would not agree that the view described in Passage 1 is consistent with the findings of

nineteenth-century chemists; he or she points out that John Dalton and the nineteenth-century

chemists found that our bodies are, like all other matter, made up of atoms.


Choice (E) is correct. In the third paragraph of Passage 1, when discussing mind-body dualism,

the author explains that Descartes may have been uncertain and ambivalent about a problem

that has chronically plagued human beings into precisely the same state of uncertainty and

ambivalence. In lines 30-31, he or she adds, Very human and very understandable. The tone of

this comment is best described as sympathetic, or understanding. The author is indicating that

because many other people throughout time have had mixed feelings concerning an issue, it is

easy to understand why Descartes had mixed feelings concerning the same issue.

Choice (A) is incorrect. In the third paragraph of Passage 1, when discussing mind-body dualism, the author explains that Descartes may have been uncertain and ambivalent about a problem that has chronically plagued human beings into precisely the same state of uncertainty and ambivalence. In lines 30-31, he or she adds, Very human and very understandable. The tone of this comment is not sarcastic. Rather than ridiculing or scorning Descartes for having mixed feelings concerning an issue, the author indicates that it is easy to understand why Descartes felt as he didafter all, many other people throughout time have had mixed feelings concerning the same issue. Choice (B) is incorrect. In the third paragraph of Passage 1, when discussing mind-body dualism, the author explains that Descartes may have been uncertain and ambivalent about a problem that has chronically plagued human beings into precisely the same state of uncertainty and ambivalence. In lines 30-31, he or she adds, Very human and very understandable. The tone of this comment is not apologetic; the author does not regretfully acknowledge that Descartes was at fault in any way. Instead, he or she acknowledges that it is easy to understand why Descartes had mixed feelings concerning an issueafter all, many other people throughout time have had mixed feelings concerning the same issue. Choice (C) is incorrect. In the third paragraph of Passage 1, when discussing mind-body dualism, the author explains that Descartes may have been uncertain and ambivalent about a problem that has chronically plagued human beings into precisely the same state of uncertainty and ambivalence. In lines 30-31, he or she adds, Very human and very understandable. The



tone of this comment is not impartial, or unbiased; indeed, the author is clearly sympathizing with Descartes. He or she is indicating that it is easy to understand why Descartes had mixed feelings concerning an issueafter all, many other people throughout time have had mixed feelings concerning the same issue. Choice (D) is incorrect. In the third paragraph of Passage 1, when discussing mind-body

dualism, the author explains that Descartes may have been uncertain and ambivalent about a

problem that has chronically plagued human beings into precisely the same state of uncertainty

and ambivalence. In lines 30-31, he or she adds, Very human and very understandable. The

tone of this comment is not admiring. Rather than expressing admiration for Descartes in these

lines, the author simply sympathizes with him, explaining that it is easy to understand why

Descartes had mixed feelings concerning an issueafter all, many other people throughout time

have had mixed feelings concerning the same issue.


Choice (D) is correct. In lines 33-35, the author of Passage 1 refers to the awe and wonder we

[humans] deservedly have for our own minds; he or she connects this reverence for our own

minds with Descartes theory of mind-body dualism. The author of Passage 2, however,

considers this attitude outdated and completely at odds with everything that scientists have

learned in molecular biology over the past decade. This author holds the view that the human

mind and body have developed in the same manner, but acknowledges that this view is

anathema to our deeply held feelings that our minds are special, somehow separate from the

material world. Therefore, it is most likely that the author of Passage 2 would consider the

attitude expressed in Passage 1 an example of humans tendency to overemphasize their

distinctiveness, or specialness.

Choice (A) is incorrect. In lines 33-35, the author of Passage 1 refers to the awe and wonder we [humans] deservedly have for our own minds; he or she connects this reverence for our own minds with Descartes theory of mind-body dualism. The author of Passage 2, however, considers this attitude outdated and completely at odds with everything that scientists have learned in molecular biology over the past decade. This author holds the view that the human mind and body have developed in the same manner, but acknowledges that this view is anathema to our deeply held feelings that our minds are special, somehow separate from the material world. Although the author of Passage 2 does maintain that scientific advances have undercut the theory of mind-body dualism, he or she does not really accuse people of disputing scientific advances. Rather, the author focuses on humans tendency to hold fast to the notion that the human mind is special. Choice (B) is incorrect. In lines 33-35, the author of Passage 1 refers to the awe and wonder we [humans] deservedly have for our own minds; he or she connects this reverence for our own minds with Descartes theory of mind-body dualism. The author of Passage 2, however, considers this attitude outdated and completely at odds with everything that scientists have learned in molecular biology over the past decade. This author holds the view that the human mind and body have developed in the same manner, but acknowledges that this view is anathema to our deeply held feelings that our minds are special, somehow separate from the material world. The author of Passage 2 probably would not consider the attitude expressed in Passage 1 evidence of peoples tendency to defend their own skepticism; this author does not present people as being generally skeptical, or doubtful. Rather, he or she is indicating that people tend to be overly certain that the human mind is special. Choice (C) is incorrect. In lines 33-35, the author of Passage 1 refers to the awe and wonder we [humans] deservedly have for our own minds; he or she connects this reverence for our own



minds with Descartes theory of mind-body dualism. The author of Passage 2, however, considers this attitude outdated and completely at odds with everything that scientists have learned in molecular biology over the past decade. This author holds the view that the human mind and body have developed in the same manner, but acknowledges that this view is anathema to our deeply held feelings that our minds are special, somehow separate from the material world. The author of Passage 2 would not consider the attitude expressed in Passage 1 evidence of peoples tendency to exaggerate the role of the body; on the contrary, he or she would likely consider it evidence of peoples tendency to exaggerate the role of the mind. Choice (E) is incorrect. In lines 33-35, the author of Passage 1 refers to the awe and wonder we

[humans] deservedly have for our own minds; he or she connects this reverence for our own

minds with Descartes theory of mind-body dualism. The author of Passage 2, however,

considers this attitude outdated and completely at odds with everything that scientists have

learned in molecular biology over the past decade. This author holds the view that the human

mind and body have developed in the same manner, but acknowledges that this view is

anathema to our deeply held feelings that our minds are special, somehow separate from the

material world. The author of Passage 2 probably would not consider the attitude expressed in

Passage 1 evidence of peoples tendency to resist identifying with other people; indeed, the

people who view the human mind with awe and wonder presumably believe that all human beings

possess special minds.


Choice (E) is correct. In line 35, the author of Passage 1 states, There is no doubt that the human mind is special. He or she then lists the ways the human mind is special, introducing each reason with the word in. The author indicates that the human mind is special in its immense capacity to feel pleasure and pain and to be aware of the pain and pleasure of others; in its ability to love and pardon; in its prodigious memory; in its ability to symbolize and narrate; in its gift of language with syntax; in its power to understand the universe and create new universes; in the speed and ease with which it processes and integrates disparate information so that problems can be solved. The author of Passage 1 uses this list, with the repeated word in, to convey the unique capabilities of the human mindthat is, the special things that only the human mind can do. Choice (A) is incorrect. In line 35, the author of Passage 1 states, There is no doubt that the human mind is special. He or she then lists the ways the human mind is special, introducing each reason with the word in. The author is not conveying the skills that human beings gradually acquire; he or she gives no indication that the things listed are learned over time. Rather, the author seems to be conveying the innate, or inborn, abilities of the human mind. The author uses the list, with the repeated word in, to convey unique capabilities of the human mindthat is, the special things that only the human mind can do. Choice (B) is incorrect. In line 35, the author of Passage 1 states, There is no doubt that the human mind is special. He or she then lists the ways the human mind is special, introducing each reason with the word in. The author is not conveying distinctions between mind and body; he or she is not explaining how the mind is different from the body, but rather seems to be indicating that the human mind is different from other animals minds. The author uses the list, with the repeated word in, to convey the unique capabilities of the human mindthat is, the special things that only the human mind can do. Choice (C) is incorrect. In line 35, the author of Passage 1 states, There is no doubt that the human mind is special. He or she then lists the ways the human mind is special, introducing each reason with the word in. The author is not conveying that humans are particularly self-absorbed; indeed, the author seems to agree with the notion that the human mind is special and



unique. He or she uses the list, with the repeated word in, to convey the unique capabilities that do make the human mind special, not to suggest that humans are self-absorbed. Choice (D) is incorrect. In line 35, the author of Passage 1 states, There is no doubt that the

human mind is special. He or she then lists the ways the human mind is special, introducing

each reason with the word in. The author is not conveying the range of emotions people

experience. The author lists attributes, not emotionsfor example, the ability to use language

with syntax is not an emotion. He or she uses the list, with the repeated word in, to convey the

unique capabilities of the human mindthat is, the special things that only the human mind can

do.


Choice (A) is correct. In line 49, the author of Passage 2 refers to the idea that our minds float

free of our genomes; in other words, the idea that the human mind and the human body

developed separately and differently. The author of Passage 2 takes issue with this idea, calling it

outdated and disproven by modern science. This idea is most similar to Descartes dualism of

the mind and the body, mentioned in line 15 of Passage 1. Descartes theory says that the body

and its parts are physical matter while the mind is not. Both the idea in line 49 (Passage 2) and

the idea in line 15 (Passage 1) indicate that the mind and body are fundamentally different and

separate.

Choice (B) is incorrect. In line 49, the author of Passage 2 refers to the idea that our minds float free of our genomes; in other words, the idea that the human mind and the human body developed separately and differently. This idea is not most similar to the idea expressed in lines 17-18 of Passage 1. In these lines, the author of Passage 1 refers to Descartes suggestion that the mind and the body interacted in some way. The idea expressed in Passage 2 has to do with the development of the human mind and the human body; it does not have to do with interactions between the mind and body after they have developed. Choice (C) is incorrect. In line 49, the author of Passage 2 refers to the idea that our minds float free of our genomes; in other words, the idea that the human mind and the human body developed separately and differently. This idea is not most similar to the idea expressed in line 36 of Passage 1. In that line, the author of Passage 1 refers to the human minds capacity to feel pleasure and pain. The idea expressed in Passage 2 has to do with the development of the human mind and the human body; it does not address specific abilities of the human mind (such as the ability to experience emotions). Choice (D) is incorrect. In line 49, the author of Passage 2 refers to the idea that our minds float free of our genomes; in other words, the idea that the human mind and the human body developed separately and differently. This idea is not most similar to the idea expressed in lines 38-39 of Passage 1. In these lines, the author of Passage 1 refers to the human minds ability to symbolize and narrate. The idea expressed in Passage 2 has to do with the development of the human mind and human body; it does not address specific abilities of the human mind (such as the ability to narrate events or experiences). Choice (E) is incorrect. In line 49, the author of Passage 2 refers to the idea that our minds float

free of our genomes; in other words, the idea that the human mind and the human body

developed separately and differently. This idea is not most similar to the idea expressed in line 39

of Passage 1. In this line, the author of Passage 1 refers to the minds gift of language with

syntax. The idea expressed in Passage 2 has to do with the development of the human mind



and human body; it does not address specific abilities of the human mind (such as the ability to

use a sophisticated language system).


Choice (C) is correct. In line 35, the author of Passage 1 states that There is no doubt that the human mind is special. In lines 58-59, the author of Passage 2 refers to humans deeply held feelings that our minds are special. Both authors use the word special to mean exceptional, or excellent and rare; theyre referring to the view that the human mind is something excellent and distinctive. Choice (A) is incorrect. In line 35, the author of Passage 1 states that There is no doubt that the human mind is special. In lines 58-59, the author of Passage 2 refers to humans deeply held feelings that our minds are special. In these lines, the word special does not mean primary, or of first rank or importance. Both authors are referring to the view that the human mind is excellent, but neither author indicates that the mind is most importantthat it is more important than any other aspect of a human. In lines 35 and 59, the word special means exceptional, not primary. Choice (B) is incorrect. In line 35, the author of Passage 1 states that There is no doubt that the human mind is special. In lines 58-59, the author of Passage 2 refers to humans deeply held feelings that our minds are special. In these lines, the word special does not mean additional, or added. Indeed, it does not make much sense to say that people believe that the human mind is added or that our minds are added. In lines 35 and 59, the word special means exceptional, or excellent, not additional. Choice (D) is incorrect. In line 35, the author of Passage 1 states that There is no doubt that the human mind is special. In lines 58-59, the author of Passage 2 refers to humans deeply held feelings that our minds are special. In these lines, the word special does not mean definite, or having distinct or certain limits. Both authors are referring to the view that the human mind is excellent and rare, not indicating that the human mind has certain limits. Choice (E) is incorrect. In line 35, the author of Passage 1 states that There is no doubt that the

human mind is special. In lines 58-59, the author of Passage 2 refers to humans deeply held

feelings that our minds are special. In these lines, the word special does not mean featured,

or displayed or presented as a special attraction. Both authors are referring to the view that the

human mind is excellent and rare, but neither author suggests that the mind is somehow

displayed or held up as a kind of attraction. In lines 35 and 59, the word special means

exceptional, not featured.


Choice (E) is correct. The author of Passage 2 explains that although it goes against our deeply

held feelings that our minds are special, science has arrived at the idea that the brain might be

assembled in much the same way as the rest of the body. The author asserts in the second

paragraph that this idea is a continuation, perhaps the culmination, of a growing up for the

human species that for too long has overestimated its own centrality in the universe. The author

suggests that the human species is growing up in that, as scientific developments occur, it is

coming to the realization that humans do not occupy a privileged place in naturemuch as a

growing and maturing child comes to realize that he or she is not the center of the universe.

Choice (A) is incorrect. The author of Passage 2 explains that although it goes against our deeply held feelings that our minds are special, science has arrived at the idea that the brain



might be assembled in much the same way as the rest of the body. The author asserts in the second paragraph that this idea is a continuation, perhaps the culmination, of a growing up for the human species that for too long has overestimated its own centrality in the universe. The author refers to Copernicus theories about Earths position in the universe, but he or she presents the acceptance of those theories as just one stage in humans realization that they are not the center of the universe. The phrase growing up does not refer only to the acceptance of Copernicus theories but rather to the entire process, sparked by multiple scientific developments, of humans recognizing that they do not occupy a privileged place in nature. Choice (B) is incorrect. The author of Passage 2 explains that although it goes against our deeply held feelings that our minds are special, science has arrived at the idea that the brain might be assembled in much the same way as the rest of the body. The author asserts in the second paragraph that this idea is a continuation, perhaps the culmination, of a growing up for the human species that for too long has overestimated its own centrality in the universe. The author does suggest that we have learned more about the brain, but he or she is not indicating that the human species is growing up in that it has an increasing understanding of and respect for the power of the human mind. Rather, the author is indicating that the human species is realizing that humans do not occupy a privileged place in naturethat humans are not the center of the universe. Choice (C) is incorrect. The author of Passage 2 explains that although it goes against our deeply held feelings that our minds are special, science has arrived at the idea that the brain might be assembled in much the same way as the rest of the body. The author asserts in the second paragraph that this idea is a continuation, perhaps the culmination, of a growing up for the human species that for too long has overestimated its own centrality in the universe. The phrase growing up does not refer to a commitment in all scientific branches to solving problems related to human survival; indeed, the author of Passage 2 does not discuss human survival. Rather, the phrase indicates that the human species is realizing that humans do not occupy a privileged place in naturethat humans are not the center of the universe. Choice (D) is incorrect. The author of Passage 2 explains that although it goes against our

deeply held feelings that our minds are special, science has arrived at the idea that the brain

might be assembled in much the same way as the rest of the body. The author asserts in the

second paragraph that this idea is a continuation, perhaps the culmination, of a growing up for

the human species that for too long has overestimated its own centrality in the universe. The

phrase growing up does not refer to an endorsement of the view that our brains are not a

product of carbon, hydrogen, and other elements; in fact, the author indicates that it is the

endorsement of the view that the human brain is made up of a bunch of molecules that might be

the culmination of humans growth. The phrase indicates that the human species is realizing that

humans do not occupy a privileged place in naturethat humans are not the center of the

universe.


Choice (B) is correct. In lines 64-72, the author of Passage 2 lists various stages in the growing

up process that has led the human species away from overestimat[ing] its own centrality in the

universe: Copernicus showed us that our planet is not at the center of the universe. William

Harvey showed that our heart is a mechanical pump. John Dalton and the nineteenth-century

chemists showed that our bodies are, like all other matter, made up of atoms. Watson and Crick

showed us how genes emerge from chains of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, and

phosphorus. In the 1990s, the Decade of the Brain, cognitive neuroscientists showed that our

minds are the product of our brains. The author of Passage 2 lists all of the things scientists have

showed us in order to make a point about the place of human beings in the universe; he or she



indicates that these scientific developments have led humans to accept that we are not at the

center of the universe.

Choice (A) is incorrect. In lines 64-72, the author of Passage 2 lists various stages in the growing


universe. He or she lists things scientists have showed us: that our planet is not at the center

of the universe, that our heart is a mechanical pump, that our bodies are . . . made up of

atoms, and so on. Although the list includes Watson and Crick, who showed us how genes

emerge from chains of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, and phosphorous, the author is not

making a point about the role of genes in shaping human development. The discovery concerning

genes is just one of the scientific developments the author asserts has led humans to accept that

we are not at the center of the universe; the authors main point is about the place of human

beings in the universe.

Choice (C) is incorrect. In lines 64-72, the author of Passage 2 lists various stages in the growing up process that has led the human species away from overestimat[ing] its own centrality in the universe. He or she lists things scientists have showed us: that our planet is not at the center of the universe, that our heart is a mechanical pump, that our bodies are . . . made up of atoms, and so on. Although twentieth-century scientists and their achievements are included in this list, the author is not making a point about the remarkable achievements of twentieth-century scientists; indeed, the list also includes scientific developments that took place well before the twentieth century. The authors main point is about the place of human beings in the universe; he or she asserts that these scientific developments have led humans to accept that we are not at the center of the universe.

Choice (D) is incorrect. In lines 64-72, the author of Passage 2 lists various stages in the growing up process that has led the human species away from overestimat[ing] its own centrality in the universe. He or she lists things scientists have showed us: that our planet is not at the center of the universe, that our heart is a mechanical pump, that our bodies are . . . made up of atoms, and so on. Although relatively recent scientific findings are mentioned, the author is not making a point about the controversial nature of recent scientific findings; indeed, most of the findings mentioned are not recent, and the author gives no indication that the findings are controversial. The authors main point is about the place of human beings in the universe; he or she asserts that these scientific developments have led humans to accept that we are not at the center of the universe. Choice (E) is incorrect. In lines 64-72, the author of Passage 2 lists various stages in the growing


universe. He or she lists things scientists have showed us: that our planet is not at the center

of the universe, that our heart is a mechanical pump, that our bodies are . . . made up of

atoms, and so on. Although the human mind is mentioned, the author is not making a point about

the fundamental mystery of the human mind; indeed, many of the scientific developments listed

are unrelated to the mystery of the mind. The authors main point is about the place of human

beings in the universe; he or she asserts that these scientific developments have led humans to

accept that we are not at the center of the universe.


Choice (D) is correct. In this part of Passage 2, the author is discussing findings showing that the

mechanisms that build our brains are just a special case of the mechanisms that build the rest of

our bodies. He or she acknowledges that the concept may seem unappealing, stating that some

might see the idea that our brains are just a bunch of molecules . . . as a bleak renunciation of all



that is special about humanity. The phrase just a bunch of molecules emphasizes that the

concept is unappealing because it seems to reduce the special human mind to something very

basic and ordinary.

Choice (A) is incorrect. In this part of Passage 2, the author is discussing findings showing that

the mechanisms that build our brains are just a special case of the mechanisms that build the rest

of our bodies. He or she acknowledges that the concept may seem unappealing, stating that

some might see the idea that our brains are just a bunch of molecules . . . as a bleak

renunciation of all that is special about humanity. The author uses the phrase just a bunch of

molecules to acknowledge that the emerging concept of the brain seems to reduce the human

mind to something very basic and ordinary and therefore is unappealing to those who firmly

believe that the mind is special. The author is not undermining the view that the mind is special,

but rather explaining how the new concept of the brain must seem to people who hold that view.

Choice (B) is incorrect. In this part of Passage 2, the author is discussing findings showing that




renunciation of all that is special about humanity. The author is not criticizing the view that the

human brain is just a bunch of molecules; in fact, the author agrees with this viewpoint, calling it

an exciting modern take on an old idea, that there is a bond that unifies all living things.

Choice (C) is incorrect. In this part of Passage 2, the author is discussing findings showing that the mechanisms that build our brains are just a special case of the mechanisms that build the rest of our bodies. He or she acknowledges that the concept may seem unappealing, stating that some might see the idea that our brains are just a bunch of molecules . . . as a bleak renunciation of all that is special about humanity. The author is not emphasizing an overly modest attitude; the author agrees with the view that the human brain is just a bunch of molecules and does not suggest that scientists are being modest in describing the mind as such. Choice (E) is incorrect. In this part of Passage 2, the author is discussing findings showing that




renunciation of all that is special about humanity. The author is not minimizing the differences

between old and new perspectives. Rather, he or she is emphasizing one difference: whereas the

old perspective holds that the human mind is special and unique, the new perspective seems to

reduce the mind to something very basic and ordinaryto nothing more than molecules.


Choice (C) is correct. The author of Passage 2 calls the view that our brains are just a bunch of molecules an exciting modern take on an old idea, that there is a bond that unifies all living things. In this context, the term take most nearly means outlook. The author is indicating that scientific findings have caused an old viewpoint to be looked at in another wayin other words, people now have a new outlook. Choice (A) is incorrect. The author of Passage 2 calls the view that our brains are just a bunch of molecules an exciting modern take on an old idea, that there is a bond that unifies all living things. In this context, the term take does not mean scene, or episode (as in a television show or movie). The author is indicating that the view of the brain represents a new outlook, not that it



is somehow a scene. Indeed, it does not make much sense to say that the new view is a modern scene on an old idea. Choice (B) is incorrect. The author of Passage 2 calls the view that our brains are just a bunch of molecules an exciting modern take on an old idea, that there is a bond that unifies all living things. In this context, the term take does not mean share, or portion belonging to one. The author is indicating that the view of the brain represents a new outlook, not that it is a portion of something that is owed to someone. Indeed, it does not make much sense to say that the new view is a modern share on an old idea. Choice (D) is incorrect. The author of Passage 2 calls the view that our brains are just a bunch of molecules an exciting modern take on an old idea, that there is a bond that unifies all living things. In this context, the term take does not mean reaction. The author is indicating that the view of the brain represents a new outlook, but he or she does not indicate that it is a direct response to the old idea that all living things are connected. Further, one would not say that a view is a modern reaction on an old idea. Choice (E) is incorrect. The author of Passage 2 calls the view that our brains are just a bunch of

molecules an exciting modern take on an old idea, that there is a bond that unifies all living

things. As it is used in line 80, the term take does not mean number, or, in this context, the

quantity of something taken at one time. It does not make sense to say that a new view of the

brain is a modern number on an old idea.


Choice (B) is correct. The author of Passage 1 discusses the mind-body dualism theory

associated with Descartes, mentioning that mainstream science and philosophy no longer

believe that the body and its parts are physical matter while the mind is not. This author

acknowledges that Descartes view appeals to the awe and wonder we deservedly have for our

own minds, but in the last line he or she cautions that awe and wonder at the human mind are

compatible with other views of the relation between the body and the mind and do not make

Descartes views any more correct. The author of Passage 2 praises the view that has replaced

mind-body dualism, asserting that the idea that our brains are just a bunch of molecules is

actually an exciting modern take on an old idea, that there is a bond that unifies all living things.

He or she goes on to conclude with a stirring, or rousing and inspiring, statement about unity

among living things: Through advances in molecular biology and neuroscience, we can now

understand better than ever just how deeply we share our biological make-up . . . with all the

creatures with which we share our planet. The final sentence of Passage 1 is cautionary, while

the final sentence of Passage 2 is stirring.

Choice (A) is incorrect. The author of Passage 1 discusses the mind-body dualism theory

associated with Descartes, mentioning that mainstream science and philosophy no longer

believe that the body and its parts are physical matter while the mind is not. This author

acknowledges that Descartes view appeals to the awe and wonder we deservedly have for our

own minds, but in the last line he or she cautions that awe and wonder at the human mind are

compatible with other views of the relation between the body and the mind and do not make

Descartes views any more correct. The final sentence of Passage 1 is not perplexed; the author

does not seem confused about anything regarding views of the human mind and body. Further,

the final sentence of Passage 2 is not resigned, or accepting of defeat. Rather, the final sentence

is stirring, or inspiring. After praising the view that has replaced mind-body dualism and asserting

that it verifies the bond that unifies all living things, the author of Passage 2 concludes with an



inspiring statement about how deeply we share our biological make-up . . . with all the creatures

with which we share our planet.

Choice (C) is incorrect. The author of Passage 1 discusses the mind-body dualism theory associated with Descartes, mentioning that mainstream science and philosophy no longer believe that the body and its parts are physical matter while the mind is not. This author acknowledges that Descartes view appeals to the awe and wonder we deservedly have for our own minds, but in the last line he or she cautions that awe and wonder at the human mind are compatible with other views of the relation between the body and the mind and do not make Descartes views any more correct. The final sentence of Passage 1 is not ironic, or humorously sarcastic; the author seems to be sincere, not sarcastic. Further, the final sentence of Passage 2 is stirring, or inspiring, not dismissive. After praising the view that has replaced mind-body dualism and asserting that it verifies the bond that unifies all living things, the author of Passage 2 concludes with an inspiring statement about how deeply we share our biological make-up . . . with all the creatures with which we share our planet. Choice (D) is incorrect. The author of Passage 1 discusses the mind-body dualism theory associated with Descartes, mentioning that mainstream science and philosophy no longer believe that the body and its parts are physical matter while the mind is not. This author acknowledges that Descartes view appeals to the awe and wonder we deservedly have for our own minds, but in the last line he or she cautions that awe and wonder at the human mind are compatible with other views of the relation between the body and the mind and do not make Descartes views any more correct. The final sentence of Passage 1 is not reverent, or worshipful; rather, it is cautionary, warning people not to believe incorrect views. Further, the final sentence of Passage 2 is not dispassionate, or unaffected by strong feeling; rather, it is stirring, or inspiring. After praising the view that has replaced mind-body dualism and asserting that it verifies the bond that unifies all living things, the author of Passage 2 concludes with an inspiring statement about how deeply we share our biological make-up . . . with all the creatures with which we share our planet. Choice (E) is incorrect. The author of Passage 1 discusses the mind-body dualism theory associated with Descartes, mentioning that mainstream science and philosophy no longer believe that the body and its parts are physical matter while the mind is not. This author acknowledges that Descartes view appeals to the awe and wonder we deservedly have for our own minds, but in the last line he or she cautions that awe and wonder at the human mind are compatible with other views of the relation between the body and the mind and do not make Descartes views any more correct. The final sentence of Passage 1 is not indignant, or angry over something unjust or unworthy; although the author cautions people not to believe incorrect views, he or she does not seem to be angry about anything. Further, the final sentence of Passage 2 is stirring, or inspiring, not surprised. After praising the view that has replaced mind-body dualism and asserting that it verifies the bond that unifies all living things, the author of Passage 2 concludes with an inspiring statement about how deeply we share our biological make-up . . . with all the creatures with which we share our planet. Critical Reading Question 24

Choice (A) is correct. Both passages suggest that the notion that the mind and body are separate

is appealing but problematic. The author of Passage 1 states that the view that most human

beings today would regard as their own holds that the body and its parts are physical matter

while the mind is not. The author suggests that this view is appealing given the awe and wonder

we . . . have for our own minds. However, the author also suggests that this view is problematic:

This view is no longer mainstream in science or philosophy and is not correct. Likewise, the

author of Passage 2 acknowledges that humans have deeply held feelings that our minds are

special, somehow separate from the material world, but also asserts that this appealing notion is



incorrect: such beliefs are completely at odds with everything that scientists have learned in

molecular biology over the past decade.

Choice (B) is incorrect. Neither the author of Passage 1 nor the author of Passage 2 considers

the notion of mind-body dualism novel, or new. Indeed, the author of Passage 1 indicates that this

theory is associated with Descartes, a seventeenth-century philosopher, and the author of

Passage 2 suggests that humans have a long history of viewing the human brain as special,

somehow separate from the material world. Further, both authors do more than call mind-body

dualism impractical; both authors indicate that the notion is incorrect.

Choice (C) is incorrect. Both passages suggest that the notion that the mind and body are

separate is appealing, which suggests that some people might find the notion reassuring; some

might be comforted by thinking of the human mind as something special that deserves awe and

wonder. However, neither the author of Passage 1 nor the author of Passage 2 considers the

notion of mind-body dualism rational, or suggests that the notion is based on reason. In fact, the

author of Passage 2 explicitly states that the notion is completely at odds with everything that

scientists have learned in molecular biology over the past decade.

Choice (D) is incorrect. Neither the author of Passage 1 nor the author of Passage 2 considers the notion of mind-body dualism innovative, or original and imaginative. Indeed, the author of Passage 1 indicates that this theory is associated with Descartes, a seventeenth-century philosopher, and the author of Passage 2 suggests that humans have a long history of viewing the human brain as special, somehow separate from the material world. Further, although both authors indicate that scientific developments have shown the theory is incorrect, neither author suggests that the theory is controversial among the general public or even among scientists. Choice (E) is incorrect. Neither the author of Passage 1 nor the author of Passage 2 considers the notion of mind-body dualism demeaning, or degrading; on the contrary, both acknowledge that the theory is appealing because it supports the human tendency to view the human brain as special and worthy of awe and wonder. Further, although both authors indicate that the theory is now outdated, neither author suggests the theory was shortsighted, or lacking in foresight, when it was developed.

Documents

2012 PSAT/NMSQT Practice Test Explanations - Section 1