Q8

[KakaJaja]

I was confused by B and C. I didn't choose B at last because I was not sure what "upper-class laboratory workers" refers to. If it does refer to the technicians, I don't know why it's wrong then. For C, I doubted whether the word "never" is correct, since in the article, the author said "rarely, if ever", can we take it as "never"? Thank you very much if anyone can help.

[ohthatpatrick]

I definitely feel you on this one. "Never" is way too strong to be provable. However, we would still have to say that (C) is the 'best' summary of the 5 choices.

I typically, on my first pass through Main Point answers, take note of extreme language

(A) says "impossible"
(B) says "prohibited"
(C) says "ensure" and "never"
(D) says "far more dependent" and "far less willing"
(E) says "relying heavily"

So there are red flags in all the answers, although extreme wording isn't categorically wrong, it just needs to be matched with comparable wording in the passage.

(E) contradicts the passage, since lines 11-19 explain that scientists were given a free pass to associate with the lowly manual labor of lab work since it was in service of their noble pursuits.

(D) makes bold comparisons that are way out of scope, since we have no information about scientists today, in terms of how dependent they are on technicians and how willing they are to acknowledge technicians' contributions.

(A) makes a strong, unsupported claim that paid lab workers were "necessary" ... that all experimentation would have been "impossible" without them. The author definitely makes the point that the technicians' importance is overlooked and under-appreciated, but would all experimentation be impossible without technicians?

(B) makes a strong, unsupported claim that lab workers were "prohibited" from taking credit. Do we have any support for that claim. The author makes the point that the snobbery of the times against wage laborers contributed to dismissing their efforts, but that's speaking of a cultural trend to ignore them, not an explicit prohibition against taking public credit. Also, the phrase "upper-class lab worker" is an oxymoron in this passage. The lab workers were lower-class, so this phrase is kinda nonsensical.

(C) makes the strong claim that lab workers were never publicly acknowledged. We can't prove that wording, but we can at least support it:
line 20-23
line 27-33
line 61-64

So if we have to hold our nose and pick something extreme, we'd rather have at least some support for it.

The easier way to like (C), though, is that it relates to the main point of the passage.

This a Clarify the Misconception passage.

1st P -- Misconception: Boyle did all his own work
2nd P -- Reality: Boyle, and other scientists like him, employed a lot of people to help them conduct experiments
3rd P -- Reason for misconception: historical tendency to congratulate the scientists and 17th century class bias between upper class scientists and lower class "servants".

What I see in (C) that I don't see in the others that would make me feel okay about picking it is the Misconception and the Reason for the Misconception.

Hope this helps.

[michellemyxu]

The word "ensure" in choice C left me the impression that, these views and social class distinctions were deliberately preventing the technicians from getting proper credit for their work, and since I don't see there's this layer of deliberate move/plot, I thought C was wrong. But the word "ensure" still bothers me when I review this question. Could someone explain a little bit more? Thanks.

[ohthatpatrick]

Unfortunately there's not much to explain. The answer contains overly charged language, like "ensure" and "never", but there isn't a BETTER summary available in the five answer choices.

So what are you gonna do?

Don't fixate on what you hate about (C). Try to make a case that any other answer choice is a BETTER summary of the main point.

I see how you hear (C) as ascribing pre-meditated intention to this whole affair.

But you can use "ensure" with neutral, passive, non-thinking parties.

"His lack of politeness combined with his offensive body odor ensured that I would never go on a date with him again."

This sentence isn't saying that "He intentionally was impolite and smelly in order to render future dates impossible."

It's just saying "These two things combined to create a certain effect."