Q13

[didi0504]

I am confused between B, C, E

thank you!!!

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Happy to help with this one...

We can make the eliminations for this question based on language contained within each of the answer choices. Both answer choices (B) and (E), while close, just aren't quite right.

(B) is not accurate. There is a view mentioned in the second paragraph that sounds like it might be a second view set up in contrast to Donna Haraway's. However, that view is not a method of writing the history of science. It's simply a view on our position within nature. And furthermore, that view is only mentioned in passing. The passage is not concerned with discussing that view, but rather Donna Harraway's.
(C) is the correct answer. Donna Haraway's view is a proposal for reforming the scientific approach to nature and this passage is entirely about discussing Donna Haraway's new look at a scientific approach to nature.
(E) is too broad. Remember for these "main point" or "primary purpose" questions, we're looking for a Goldilocks effect. Not too narrow, and also not too broad. This answer choice is way to broad because we are only discussing one new book on the history of science in this passage - Donna Haraway's Primate Visions.

Does that answer your question?

[antarias90]

Do you mind making sure I am on the right track with this problem?

I initially answered (d) which in retrospect was a bad answer because it mentions the "history of women in science" and the "assumptions" underlying it. This is a book about primates from a feminist perspective (among other things) which is a totally different thing than a book about women in science. What caught my attention about it relative to the other answers was that it actually said book.

C bugged me because it described Haraway's book as a "proposal." Can you explain to me what clues might give us insight into her book as a "proposal" in the passage?

On another note, is it sufficient to say that 'proposal' is not the best way to describe this, but given the rest of the answer, and how wrong the other four answers are, this is a question where the least wrong is the winner and POE is once again proven to be the most amazing tool on LSAT RC ever?

[kburgess.anderson]

Hey all,

As I'm looking at it now, I see much clearer arguments for B than for C.

B) Right away in paragraph one the author leads distinguishes Primate Visions as written from a feminist perspective. Paragraph two clarifies how different Haraway's perspective is from that of traditional scientists'. Then, paragraph three delineates the way that Haraway's writing style is "unorthodox" that is, in conflict with traditional history of science writing styles. In the final paragraph we read about another "innovation" that would separate Haraway from traditional scientific historians: she incorporates broad cultural views in her writing.

C) The only place I see mention of anything that comes close to a "proposal" comes halfway through the second paragraph: "She proposes an approach that not only recognizes diverse human actors, but also recognizes the creatures usually subsumed under nature as active participants in creating the knowledge as well." So yes, she proposes a new approach, but we are looking at the "style and content" of her book Primate Visions which is primarily an "ambitious book on history of science" not primarily a "proposal to reform the scientific approach to nature".

Does anyone see something I'm missing?

Thx!!

[Sweetangel]

Why not A??

[asafezrati]

Imo C is the one mainly because it is the least worse among 5 bad or inaccurate answer choices.

A is too narrow, only a part of a rich approach, and mentioned mainly in p1 and p2.
B treats DH's approach and the other, more common (popular/traditional/bad) one, as two methods which are presented. Only DH is fairly represented. The traditional method is used only to expand on DH's, and really is on the sideline.
C is bad because the author speaks of a book and an approach presented in it. Going from there to "proposal" is something that seems contrary to the LSAT spirit. Maybe the word "proposes" on line 21 does the trick. It certainly is the best choice among the five.
D focuses on women in science...
E is also too narrow.

[ohthatpatrick]

Start this question by pre-phrasing your own answer.

What was the primary concern of this passage? (i.e. What was the main point / purpose)

It was a book report!

The passage is just telling us all about Donna Haraway's book.

What are some salient big ideas the author would want us to know about her book?
- ambitious / feminist
- blurs the line between knower and object of study
- rejects a single objective reality for many, partial realities
- uses unorthodox style / structure

(A) This was a book report, not an essay about gender and class in science.

(B) This was a book report, not a compare/contrast between two different methods of writing the history of science.

(C) Can we call Haraway's book "a proposal to reform the scientific approach to nature"?

I guess so. She "challenges the traditional disjunction". She argues that the typical approach is based on masculinist/colonialist views of nature. She argues that the status quo is no longer viable. She proposes an alternative approach. (This is all lines 12-22)

Did the author talk about the content/style of Haraway's book? Most definitely!

(D) I loved it ... until it called her book a "history of women in science".

(E) Say whaa? This is a book report, not an essay on the effects of theoretical positions on blah-blah-blah.

Note: it's definitely possible for an author to use a book as a springboard for a different discussion.

But this passage didn't! It stayed about the book the whole time. The author doesn't even really make a clear appearance in terms of evaluating Haraway. Our author seems largely impressed by Haraway's original ideas and style, but the whole passage is really presenting Haraway's book.

[hnadgauda]

What's the aim of this passage? Prephrase time. The author talks about Haraway's book the entire time! How different it is from the traditional books on the history of science!

A: the book may be about that but not the passage!
B: the methods of writing the history of science...tempting. but ultimately wrong! both methods aren't given equal weight. And there's a much better answer here.
C: yes! Haraway's book is about reformin the scientific approach to nature (Para 2) and the passage is about the content and style of this book!
D: this book is not about the history of women in science.
E: no. totally out of scope!

[JoP960]

I read the explanation above but still got question about this one. I think answer C is only a part of this passage. But this question is asking for a main point of the whole passage.

I don't think Haraway proposed any reform of writing style or how to combine internal issues and external issues together. She is innovative in both aspects but she didn't propose any reform towards those 2 angles. What she did is only about reforming the approach to consider the relationship between nature and ourselves. So basically, answer C only focus on paragraph 2 not the whole passage. I agree this answer is the most close to the passage comparing to other answers. But could an answer which only focus on a paragraph be the correct answer of the main point of the whole passage?