Q10

[sumukh09]

Is B wrong because they haven't "generally" remained unskewed?

[ohthatpatrick]

Normally, I think you'd be right to see "generally" as the dealbreaker.

In RC, words that signify "most", such as
normally
generally
usually
probably
typically
tends to

are super dangerous.

However, we DO actually have a 'most' in line 11.

So it would be fair for me to say that 'the intellectual systems mentioned in line 11' have generally been supported by the philosophical approach of Objectivism .

So our real question is does "supported by Objectivism" = "remained unskewed by particular points of view".

This is really tricky ... Objectivism refers to the notion of remaining unskewed by particular points of view.

But someone or something who believes in (is supported by the philosophical approach of) Objectivism might still be skewed by having a particular point of view.

So even though these intellectual systems are guided by Objectivism as a philosophical approach, they might still be skewed by particular points of view.

In a sense, this is the difference between saying "John is a perfectionist" and "John is perfect". The first just describes the philosophical intention. The second describes the successful achievement of that ideal.

Meanwhile, (A) is safer because "supported by the philosophical approach of Objectivism for centuries" is pretty close to "long assumed the possibility of a neutral depiction of events".

The language of (A) doesn't assume that these intellectual systems succeed in being objective, only that they're striving for / believing in it.

Tough answer choice. Good question.

[WaltGrace1983]

I eliminated (B) by thinking about the main point of the passage. The main point is that objectivism is skewed - it basically takes every person who is educated in legal language as possessing the truth while disparaging the layman's interpretations as false. In addition, the words "particular points of view" is also very telling because these "particular points of view" ostensibly refers to those held by people educated in legal matters.

(A) made a lot more sense because these "intellectual systems" are supported by objectivism (9-11). Thus, these intellectual systems would advocate objectivist ideals, namely that there is a neutral depiction of events.

(C) The whole passage is about people analyzing these discursive practices!

(D) Objectivism is all about negating emotion and experience ("the law's quest for truth, therefore, consists of locating this objective description...")

(E) The passage actually says in lines 20-27 that psychologists have affirmed that no one can really see something objectively. Thus, the true accuracy of one's testimony is fairly uncertain. This answer is probably out of scope anyway.