PrepTest 73, Passage 3, Question 21
Transcript
Question 21 asks for a sentence that would logically complete the passage. This is one of the rarer ways that they test asks us about the main point or the overall agenda of a passage. Because the best thing to put at the end of the passage would be something that understands the overall goal of the passage. It wouldn't be introducing any new information, just summing up what's already been said.
Also, if you glance at the answers, all of them begin with the word therefore. So they're definitely looking for a conclusion. Also these kinda questions the context at the end of the passage is also important because the new sentence has to connect to what was right in front of it. So remember, in this passage at the end, there was a caveat where the author said that the ads can sometimes be bad and that they can sometimes be good.
So it'll need to hook onto that somehow, but we won't know until we go to the answer choices to figure out what it's gonna do. So answer choice A, therefore in principle, while there may be grounds for holding that advertising is detrimental to society the mark using critique does not provide such ground, does definitely connects to the overall thrust of the passage which was Marcuse is wrong.
And notice that it connects to that caveat, too, because there might be grounds for holding that advertising is detrimental because the author had just said, well, sure, ads can be sometimes bad. So this understands both the caveat and the overall thrust of the passage, so it is our answer. So then we have four wrong answers to review.
Answer choice B, therefore, although Marcusian claims about advertising are rationally justified, well, that part's probably wrong, but this brings up that cliche again, political gain. Marcuse isn't making political arguments, even though you might hear someone talking like Marcuse and think, that guy definitely has a political agenda. But the political agenda is never mentioned here.
So we can't insert it as new information. Answer choice C is wrong because it brings up the boogie men of corporate leaders. There's a passing reference to corporations in the first paragraph, but at no point does the author even hint that we need corporate leaders to change their perception of human nature. So answer choice D is wrong, because it goes to far.
And you might be tempted for this one, because we know that the author thinks that there are good things and bad things about advertisements. But the author doesn't actually do a final analysis and weigh them out and say, well, clearly the good outweighs the bad. So this one is too extreme for our author. And then finally answer choice E, therefore, the Marcusian critique of advertising is mistaken, that part's okay.
Except in its claim that advertisers exert economic power over those few people who were unable or unwilling. Well, this is a Marcusian's claim. Marcuse doesn't claim that a few people are subject to the manipulative power of advertisements argues things that pretty much everybody in society is. So this doesn't even get Marcuse right.
It can't be the end of this passage, answer choice A was the right answer, and that is the last question for this passage.
Read full transcriptAlso, if you glance at the answers, all of them begin with the word therefore. So they're definitely looking for a conclusion. Also these kinda questions the context at the end of the passage is also important because the new sentence has to connect to what was right in front of it. So remember, in this passage at the end, there was a caveat where the author said that the ads can sometimes be bad and that they can sometimes be good.
So it'll need to hook onto that somehow, but we won't know until we go to the answer choices to figure out what it's gonna do. So answer choice A, therefore in principle, while there may be grounds for holding that advertising is detrimental to society the mark using critique does not provide such ground, does definitely connects to the overall thrust of the passage which was Marcuse is wrong.
And notice that it connects to that caveat, too, because there might be grounds for holding that advertising is detrimental because the author had just said, well, sure, ads can be sometimes bad. So this understands both the caveat and the overall thrust of the passage, so it is our answer. So then we have four wrong answers to review.
Answer choice B, therefore, although Marcusian claims about advertising are rationally justified, well, that part's probably wrong, but this brings up that cliche again, political gain. Marcuse isn't making political arguments, even though you might hear someone talking like Marcuse and think, that guy definitely has a political agenda. But the political agenda is never mentioned here.
So we can't insert it as new information. Answer choice C is wrong because it brings up the boogie men of corporate leaders. There's a passing reference to corporations in the first paragraph, but at no point does the author even hint that we need corporate leaders to change their perception of human nature. So answer choice D is wrong, because it goes to far.
And you might be tempted for this one, because we know that the author thinks that there are good things and bad things about advertisements. But the author doesn't actually do a final analysis and weigh them out and say, well, clearly the good outweighs the bad. So this one is too extreme for our author. And then finally answer choice E, therefore, the Marcusian critique of advertising is mistaken, that part's okay.
Except in its claim that advertisers exert economic power over those few people who were unable or unwilling. Well, this is a Marcusian's claim. Marcuse doesn't claim that a few people are subject to the manipulative power of advertisements argues things that pretty much everybody in society is. So this doesn't even get Marcuse right.
It can't be the end of this passage, answer choice A was the right answer, and that is the last question for this passage.
