Calling for help!!!! (LNAT)
Hello everyone! My name is John Willis and I tried the LNAT Practice Paper 1 available on the website and I desperately need some help
I truly appreciate anyone who could help to give some explanations to the following questions:
Pilgrims and Pioneers: Question 1
A New Strange Mask for Science: Question 1
Car Ownership: Question 4
Really need some help!
Truly appreciate!
I truly appreciate anyone who could help to give some explanations to the following questions:
Pilgrims and Pioneers: Question 1
A New Strange Mask for Science: Question 1
Car Ownership: Question 4
Really need some help!
Truly appreciate!I notice 27 of you have seen my request, I really appreciate if any one of you could help by providing some guidance!
Original post by gt459
Guidance on what exactly? You've just specified individual questions, not the part you are stuck on.
I can't thank you more for responding!! I look forward to hearing your advice soon, many thanks! Here is the question that I find most challenging from LNAT Practice Test 1, the correct answer is (e) could u help to explain?
Pilgrims and Pioneers:
Q1) In the first three paragraphs of this passage, all of the following words advance theargument except:
(a) ‘However...’(b) ‘Also...’
(c) ‘Even...’
(d) ‘Yet...’
(e) ‘Ironically...’
For your ease of reference, I have pasted passage 1 here below
" Pilgrims and Pioneers Across the Atlantic in the middle of the nineteenth century the independentspirit of America’s pioneers still flourished. Neither prosperity nor the bitterdivisions of the Civil War subdued its energy, which spilled over into manyaspects of life, including fiction and popular song. “Uncle Sam’s Farm” waswritten by the Hutchinson family singers in the 1840s. It reflected the pride feltby many Americans in the land and opportunity which had been won by theirfathers and consolidated through later technical achievements. However thelyric substituted enthusiasm for accuracy. Suffrage was still denied to a largeproportion of the community, including all white women and of course negroslaves of both sexes. Also educational facilities for children were fragmentedand far from universal.
As they entertained, the Hutchinson family campaigned for women’s suffrage,temperance and the abolition of slavery, three causes which were ofteninterrelated, and for which support was increasing, especially in the northernstates. Traditions of feminine inferiority had been meaningless in pioneer life:freer attitudes developed among early immigrants who had escaped fromreligious and political oppression in Europe. (The Quakers, for instance,accepted the equality of men and women, and had made education availableto girls as well as boys since the seventeenth century. Quaker women did notpromise to obey their husbands and were encouraged to speak in public atreligious meetings.) Men and women facing hard-ship and danger together hadwrested farmlands and homes from the wild country. Even when pioneeringdays were over, self-reliance, rather than over-sentimentalized femininity,remained the quintessence of many American women. They were becomingreal partners in marriage, no longer dominated, pampered or hoisted on topedestals.
Yet women’s legal position remained as anachronistic and degrading as in earlyVictorian England. In 1849 the Tennessee Legislature solemnly decreed thatwomen should not be given the right to own property as they had no souls. Thiswas bigotry at its most ludicrous, but legal and economic control remainedentirely in the hands of men, and double standards of sexual moralitypersisted. In 1848 the first Women’s Rights Convention took place. This wasorganized at Seneca Falls by Mrs Lucretia Mott and Mrs Elizabeth Cady Stanton,two Americans who had met in 1840 at an Anti-Slavery Convention in London.Ironically, because of their sex, Mrs Mott and Mrs Cady Stanton were debarredfrom taking part in this conference as many of the male delegates, thoughsufficiently progressive to seek the abolition of slavery, still held entrenchedprejudices against women. The Seneca Falls meeting demanded suffrage andequality for women, and marked the beginning of an organized Americanfeminist movement. Its leaders were colourful and determined, and in 1849 TheLily appeared. This was a monthly journal devoted to women’s interests, whichbecame increasingly outspoken and challenging. Its editor was Mrs AmeliaBloomer, who is more famous for the bifurcated garment which bears her namethan for her literary achievement.
American girls and women were as handicapped by their restrictive clothes astheir English counterparts. Multiple underskirts were reinforced with horsehairand straw, while waists and midriffs were tortured by steel and whalebonecorsets. The Lily came out strongly against stupidities of dress, and drew attention to the disproportionate amount of time spent by many women on the drudgery of making over-decorated clothes and household linen. In the spirit ofvegetarians advocating that all meat eaters should themselves kill the animalsfor their table, Mrs Cady Stanton suggested that everyone, men and boysincluded, should be made to do their own sewing and that clothes should bekept functional. The Bloomer was one result in1851 of women’s efforts toproduce a sensible item of clothing. Contemporary illustrations of these ankle-length Turkish pantaloons, worn under a skirt reaching below the knee, suggestimpeccable propriety. However bloomers produced apoplectic resentmentamong conservative factions of society when they were adopted for three orfour years as the battle uniform of leading feminists. The Bloomer had greatpublicity value, and became synonymous with the demand for physical andpsychological emancipation. " (extracted from LNAT Practice Test 1)
I would use the reply, however wall of text hit me for 9999 dmg.
However, also, yet and even are all used within the text to introduce additional pieces of information that "progress" the argument of the piece. On the other hand, ironically is used to bring attention to a side note, an obiter dictum if you will. The information included after "ironically" does not progress the argument, merely supports it.
It is assessing your understanding of how arguments are structured when written.
*As a side note I study Law at the University of Bristol and have sat the LNAT - it's not that difficult I promise.
However, also, yet and even are all used within the text to introduce additional pieces of information that "progress" the argument of the piece. On the other hand, ironically is used to bring attention to a side note, an obiter dictum if you will. The information included after "ironically" does not progress the argument, merely supports it.
It is assessing your understanding of how arguments are structured when written.
*As a side note I study Law at the University of Bristol and have sat the LNAT - it's not that difficult I promise.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by gt459
I would use the reply, however wall of text hit me for 9999 dmg.
However, also, yet and even are all used within the text to introduce additional pieces of information that "progress" the argument of the piece. On the other hand, ironically is used to bring attention to a side note, an obiter dictum if you will. The information included after "ironically" does not progress the argument, merely supports it.
It is assessing your understanding of how arguments are structured when written.
*As a side note I study Law at the University of Bristol and have sat the LNAT - it's not that difficult I promise.
However, also, yet and even are all used within the text to introduce additional pieces of information that "progress" the argument of the piece. On the other hand, ironically is used to bring attention to a side note, an obiter dictum if you will. The information included after "ironically" does not progress the argument, merely supports it.
It is assessing your understanding of how arguments are structured when written.
*As a side note I study Law at the University of Bristol and have sat the LNAT - it's not that difficult I promise.
Wow! This truly enlightening!! I never think it in this way and it literally changes my way of seeing an argument! Hey, you know what? I am applying to Bristol University this year! But I am really not sure would I ever reach their expected LNAT score. If you have some time, I am grateful if you could also advise me on the questions below (extracted from LNAT Practice Test II). Much appreciated
I'd love to learn about your rationale for the right answers. The Myth of Mars and Venus
John Gray’s Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus contains a chapterentitled Speaking Different Languages. In it, Gray says that the “original” Martiansand Venusians communicated without difficulty, because they knew their languageswere mutually incomprehensible. Modern men and women, by contrast, are underthe illusion that they speak the same language. But though the words they use maybe the same, their meanings for each sex are different. The result is that men andwomen often do not understand one another.
The idea that men and women metaphorically “speak different languages” is not,of course, popular or new, but the myth of Mars and Venus has given it newcurrency and legitimacy. What was once just a metaphor has acquired the status ofliteral, scientific truth. Today, it is widely believed that misunderstanding betweenmen and women is a widespread and serious problem. But is our concern about itjustified by the evidence, or is “male-female miscommunication” a myth?
Before the myth of Mars and Venus, the idea that women communicate lessdirectly than men was associated with concerns about women’s alleged lack ofassertiveness and confidence. The importance of speaking was a staple topic inassertiveness training, and advice based on the same principle was common in self-help books and women’s magazines, especially those addressed to professionalwomen. For instance, a 1992 article in Options magazine on “10 classic careermistakes all women make” lists “using tentative language” as number nine. “Howmany times have you heard someone say things like, ‘I’m not really sure if I’mright, but perhaps...’?” the article asked. “With all that kind of talk, who is going tobelieve we are confident in what we are saying?... Too often we make statementsas if they were questions, such as, ‘We’ll bring the deadline forward, OK?’ ”
Options counsels women to avoid tentative language on the grounds that it makesthem sound weak and indecisive – the argument put forward by Robin Lakoff in herinfluential 1970s text, Language and Woman’s Place. But, over time, a differentargument has become more popular. The following tip comes from Glamourmagazine: “Speak directly to male subordinates. Women tend to shy away fromgiving a blatant order, but men find the indirect approach manipulative andconfusing.” Here women are told to speak directly to men, not becauseindirectness undermines their authority but because men find it “manipulative andconfusing”. The substance of the advice has not changed, but the theory behind ithas shifted from a “deficit model” of gender differences (women’s ways ofspeaking are inferior to men’s) to a “cross-cultural approach” (the two styles areequally valid, but the difference between them can lead to misunderstanding).
This raises two questions. First, if the male and female styles are equally valid,why does it always seem to be women who are told they must accommodate tomen’s preferences – even, apparently, when men are their subordinates? Isavoiding male-female miscommunication an exclusively female responsibility?Second, though, why is it assumed that indirectness causes miscommunication inthe first place? What is the evidence that men are confused by it?
(Source: Deborah Cameron, The Myth of Mars and Venus, Oxford University Press,2007)(published in The Guardian, 2 October, 2007)
Sample Test 2
19
Cameron argues persuasively that the Mars and Venus myth does threaten women.Consistently, as she shows, aspects of the way our society is currently structuredare taken to be clues to some basic difference in the nature of men and women,which always turns out to be to women’s disadvantage, a “natural” reason to keepthem in lower-status roles. Cameron discusses Simon Baron-Cohen’s book, TheEssential Difference, which posits a distinction between the male and femalebrains and concludes that “people with the female brain”, supposedly moreempathetic, are better at jobs such as nursing,... and the male-brained,supposedly more analytical, make better lawyers. Cameron comments aptly thatnurses also need to be analytical and lawyers need people skills: “Thesecategorisations are not based on a dispassionate analysis of the demands made bythe two jobs. They are based on the everyday common-sense knowledge that mostnurses are women and most lawyers are men.”
(Source: Steven Poole, The Guardian , 20 October 2007)
1.
Which of the following is Deborah Cameron’s main objection to John Gray’stheory about ‘miscommunication’? (Answer is C)
2.
(a) Male and female brains are not different.
3.
(b) Women talk as well as men do.
4.
(c) There is insufficient evidence for Gray’s theory.
5.
(d) Women should not have to change the way they speak.
6.
(e) Men can easily understand what women say.
7.
Which one of the following would agree that women speak less effectivelythan men? (Answer is D)
8.
(a) Simon Baron-Cohen
9.
(b) Deborah Cameron
10.
(c) John Gray
11.
(d) Robin Lakoff
12.
(e) Glamour magazine
13.
Glamour magazine and Options magazine would agree on all of the followingexceptAnswer is A)
14.
(a) women can be misunderstood by men
15.
(b) women’s speech affects their careers
16.
(c) women should speak directly to men
17.
(d) women should be the ones to change the way they speak
18.
(e) there are gender differences in speech
19.
What is Deborah Cameron’s main objection to Simon Baron-Cohen’s views? (Answer is B)
20.
(a) It is not natural for women to be kept in lower-status roles
21.
(b) Simon Baron-Cohen’s categories have no evidence to support them
22.
(c) Men are not more analytical than women
23.
(d) Simon Baron-Cohen’s job categories are incorrect
24.
(e) Male and female brains are not different
Hello everyone! My name is John Willis and I tried the LNAT Practice Paper 2 available on the website and I desperately need some help
If you have some time, I am grateful if anyone could advise me on the questions below (extracted from LNAT Practice Test II). Much appreciated
I'd love to learn about your rationale for the right answers.
The Myth of Mars and Venus
John Gray’s Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus contains a chapterentitled Speaking Different Languages. In it, Gray says that the “original” Martiansand Venusians communicated without difficulty, because they knew their languageswere mutually incomprehensible. Modern men and women, by contrast, are underthe illusion that they speak the same language. But though the words they use maybe the same, their meanings for each sex are different. The result is that men andwomen often do not understand one another.
The idea that men and women metaphorically “speak different languages” is not,of course, popular or new, but the myth of Mars and Venus has given it newcurrency and legitimacy. What was once just a metaphor has acquired the status ofliteral, scientific truth. Today, it is widely believed that misunderstanding betweenmen and women is a widespread and serious problem. But is our concern about itjustified by the evidence, or is “male-female miscommunication” a myth?
Before the myth of Mars and Venus, the idea that women communicate lessdirectly than men was associated with concerns about women’s alleged lack ofassertiveness and confidence. The importance of speaking was a staple topic inassertiveness training, and advice based on the same principle was common in self-help books and women’s magazines, especially those addressed to professionalwomen. For instance, a1992article in Options magazine on “10 classic careermistakes all women make” lists “using tentative language” as number nine. “Howmany times have you heard someone say things like, ‘I’m not really sure if I’mright, but perhaps...’?” the article asked. “With all that kind of talk, who is going tobelieve we are confident in what we are saying?... Too often we make statementsas if they were questions, such as, ‘We’ll bring the deadline forward, OK?’ ”
Options counsels women to avoid tentative language on the grounds that it makesthem sound weak and indecisive – the argument put forward by Robin Lakoff in herinfluential 1970s text, Language and Woman’s Place. But, over time, a differentargument has become more popular. The following tip comes from Glamourmagazine: “Speak directly to male subordinates. Women tend to shy away fromgiving a blatant order, but men find the indirect approach manipulative andconfusing.” Here women are told to speak directly to men, not becauseindirectness undermines their authority but because men find it “manipulative andconfusing”. The substance of the advice has not changed, but the theory behind ithas shifted from a “deficit model” of gender differences (women’s ways ofspeaking are inferior to men’s) to a “cross-cultural approach” (the two styles areequally valid, but the difference between them can lead to misunderstanding).
This raises two questions. First, if the male and female styles are equally valid,why does it always seem to be women who are told they must accommodate tomen’s preferences – even, apparently, when men are their subordinates? Isavoiding male-female miscommunication an exclusively female responsibility?Second, though, why is it assumed that indirectness causes miscommunication inthe first place? What is the evidence that men are confused by it?
(Source: Deborah Cameron, The Myth of Mars and Venus, Oxford University Press,2007)(published in The Guardian, 2 October, 2007)
Sample Test 2
19
Cameron argues persuasively that the Mars and Venus myth does threaten women.Consistently, as she shows, aspects of the way our society is currently structuredare taken to be clues to some basic difference in the nature of men and women,which always turns out to be to women’s disadvantage, a “natural” reason to keepthem in lower-status roles. Cameron discusses Simon Baron-Cohen’s book, TheEssential Difference, which posits a distinction between the male and femalebrains and concludes that “people with the female brain”, supposedly moreempathetic, are better at jobs such as nursing,... and the male-brained,supposedly more analytical, make better lawyers. Cameron comments aptly thatnurses also need to be analytical and lawyers need people skills: “Thesecategorisations are not based on a dispassionate analysis of the demands made bythe two jobs. They are based on the everyday common-sense knowledge that mostnurses are women and most lawyers are men.”
(Source: Steven Poole, The Guardian , 20 October 2007)
If you have some time, I am grateful if anyone could advise me on the questions below (extracted from LNAT Practice Test II). Much appreciated
I'd love to learn about your rationale for the right answers. The Myth of Mars and Venus
John Gray’s Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus contains a chapterentitled Speaking Different Languages. In it, Gray says that the “original” Martiansand Venusians communicated without difficulty, because they knew their languageswere mutually incomprehensible. Modern men and women, by contrast, are underthe illusion that they speak the same language. But though the words they use maybe the same, their meanings for each sex are different. The result is that men andwomen often do not understand one another.
The idea that men and women metaphorically “speak different languages” is not,of course, popular or new, but the myth of Mars and Venus has given it newcurrency and legitimacy. What was once just a metaphor has acquired the status ofliteral, scientific truth. Today, it is widely believed that misunderstanding betweenmen and women is a widespread and serious problem. But is our concern about itjustified by the evidence, or is “male-female miscommunication” a myth?
Before the myth of Mars and Venus, the idea that women communicate lessdirectly than men was associated with concerns about women’s alleged lack ofassertiveness and confidence. The importance of speaking was a staple topic inassertiveness training, and advice based on the same principle was common in self-help books and women’s magazines, especially those addressed to professionalwomen. For instance, a1992article in Options magazine on “10 classic careermistakes all women make” lists “using tentative language” as number nine. “Howmany times have you heard someone say things like, ‘I’m not really sure if I’mright, but perhaps...’?” the article asked. “With all that kind of talk, who is going tobelieve we are confident in what we are saying?... Too often we make statementsas if they were questions, such as, ‘We’ll bring the deadline forward, OK?’ ”
Options counsels women to avoid tentative language on the grounds that it makesthem sound weak and indecisive – the argument put forward by Robin Lakoff in herinfluential 1970s text, Language and Woman’s Place. But, over time, a differentargument has become more popular. The following tip comes from Glamourmagazine: “Speak directly to male subordinates. Women tend to shy away fromgiving a blatant order, but men find the indirect approach manipulative andconfusing.” Here women are told to speak directly to men, not becauseindirectness undermines their authority but because men find it “manipulative andconfusing”. The substance of the advice has not changed, but the theory behind ithas shifted from a “deficit model” of gender differences (women’s ways ofspeaking are inferior to men’s) to a “cross-cultural approach” (the two styles areequally valid, but the difference between them can lead to misunderstanding).
This raises two questions. First, if the male and female styles are equally valid,why does it always seem to be women who are told they must accommodate tomen’s preferences – even, apparently, when men are their subordinates? Isavoiding male-female miscommunication an exclusively female responsibility?Second, though, why is it assumed that indirectness causes miscommunication inthe first place? What is the evidence that men are confused by it?
(Source: Deborah Cameron, The Myth of Mars and Venus, Oxford University Press,2007)(published in The Guardian, 2 October, 2007)
Sample Test 2
19
Cameron argues persuasively that the Mars and Venus myth does threaten women.Consistently, as she shows, aspects of the way our society is currently structuredare taken to be clues to some basic difference in the nature of men and women,which always turns out to be to women’s disadvantage, a “natural” reason to keepthem in lower-status roles. Cameron discusses Simon Baron-Cohen’s book, TheEssential Difference, which posits a distinction between the male and femalebrains and concludes that “people with the female brain”, supposedly moreempathetic, are better at jobs such as nursing,... and the male-brained,supposedly more analytical, make better lawyers. Cameron comments aptly thatnurses also need to be analytical and lawyers need people skills: “Thesecategorisations are not based on a dispassionate analysis of the demands made bythe two jobs. They are based on the everyday common-sense knowledge that mostnurses are women and most lawyers are men.”
(Source: Steven Poole, The Guardian , 20 October 2007)
1.
Which of the following is Deborah Cameron’s main objection to John Gray’stheory about ‘miscommunication’? (Answer is C)
2.
(a) Male and female brains are not different.
3.
(b) Women talk as well as men do.
4.
(c) There is insufficient evidence for Gray’s theory.
5.
(d) Women should not have to change the way they speak.
6.
(e) Men can easily understand what women say.
7.
Which one of the following would agree that women speak less effectivelythan men? (Answer is D)
8.
(a) Simon Baron-Cohen
9.
(b) Deborah Cameron
10.
(c) John Gray
11.
(d) Robin Lakoff
12.
(e) Glamour magazine
13.
Glamour magazine and Options magazine would agree on all of the followingexceptAnswer is A)
14.
(a) women can be misunderstood by men
15.
(b) women’s speech affects their careers
16.
(c) women should speak directly to men
17.
(d) women should be the ones to change the way they speak
18.
(e) there are gender differences in speech
19.
What is Deborah Cameron’s main objection to Simon Baron-Cohen’s views? (Answer is B)
20.
(a) It is not natural for women to be kept in lower-status roles
21.
(b) Simon Baron-Cohen’s categories have no evidence to support them
22.
(c) Men are not more analytical than women
23.
(d) Simon Baron-Cohen’s job categories are incorrect
24.
(e) Male and female brains are not different
Original post by Da Di Doo
Could you not have put the answers at the end.
Thank you for responding!! Actually the answers are provided by the LNAT, but I really don't understand the rationale behind the right and wrong answers, could u help me out? Very much appreciated.
Original post by John.Willis
Thank you for responding!! Actually the answers are provided by the LNAT, but I really don't understand the rationale behind the right and wrong answers, could u help me out? Very much appreciated.
Process of elimination...
1. A and E are definitely wrong (contradicts the text).
You might get confused between C and D but read the last section of text, from "This raises two questions..."
Then read question 1 again. Deborah's main argument against the theory is that there is not enough evidence.
Wow!! I see! That's truly amazing! Thank you so much I look forward to your advice for the next 3 questions!!
I look forward to your advice for the next 3 questions!!Hi, I need to run some errands shortly but I will certainly check out your advice when I return. Cheers!
Original post by Da Di Doo
Process of elimination...
1. A and E are definitely wrong (contradicts the text).
You might get confused between C and D but read the last section of text, from "This raises two questions..."
Then read question 1 again. Deborah's main argument against the theory is that there is not enough evidence.
1. A and E are definitely wrong (contradicts the text).
You might get confused between C and D but read the last section of text, from "This raises two questions..."
Then read question 1 again. Deborah's main argument against the theory is that there is not enough evidence.
Wow!! I see! That's truly amazing! Thank you so much
I look forward to your advice for the next 3 questions!!Thank you so much for all the help!!
One more last passage just before my test, really appreciate if someone could help and explain the rationale behind the right answers!
5 Mechanics’ Institutions
In practically every town of any size an intelligent workman who wanted to improve and educate himself would find by the forties a Mechanics’ Institution, or some similar society. In England, in 1850, it was estimated that there were seven hundred of these societies with 107,000 members. The libraries connected with them contained over 690,000 books. But though the figures sound impressive, these institutions caused much searching of heart. They had failed to fulfil the expectations of their founders. Their rate of mortality was high, though their birth- rate was also high, and even in those that were comfortably established the membership was apt to fluctuate with alarming rapidity. To understand their position, it is necessary to glance back at their origins.
These institutions were started by Brougham and Birkbeck in the twenties at a time when, as a writer described it, “there still prevailed in many quarters a strong jealousy of any political discussion by the people, and still more of any society which proposed to assemble periodically several hundreds of the labouring classes”. Hence their founders, in their desire to conciliate opposition, banned political or religious discussion or books, and forbade newspapers. Even so, the St James’ Chronicle could say of the London Mechanics’ Institution in 1825, “A scheme more completely adapted for the destruction of this empire could not have been invented by the author of evil himself than that which the depraved ambition of some men, the vanity of others, and the supineness of a third and more important class, has so nearly perfected.” Even their advocates felt a certain need for apology: “I am at a loss,” said Sir Benjamin Heywood, President of the Manchester Mechanics’ Institution, in 1827, “to see how we are disturbing the proper station of the working classes, and giving them an undue elevation; we do not alter their relative position; a spirit of intellectual activity, unequalled in any age or country, now prevails amongst us, and, if the superstructure be renewed and strengthened, it does not seem fitting that the foundation should be neglected.”.
Mechanics’ Institutions were established in the hope of popularizing scientific knowledge, and incidentally making the workman better at his work. The latter motive at first received the chief emphasis. At Manchester, for example, the preamble declared that “this society was formed for the purpose of enabling Mechanics and Artizans of whatever trade they may be, to become acquainted with such branches of science as are of practical application in the exercise of that trade, that they may possess a more thorough knowledge of their business, acquire a greater degree of skill in the practice of it, and be qualified to make improvements and even new inventions in the Arts which they respectively profess.”.
One more last passage just before my test, really appreciate if someone could help and explain the rationale behind the right answers!
5 Mechanics’ Institutions
In practically every town of any size an intelligent workman who wanted to improve and educate himself would find by the forties a Mechanics’ Institution, or some similar society. In England, in 1850, it was estimated that there were seven hundred of these societies with 107,000 members. The libraries connected with them contained over 690,000 books. But though the figures sound impressive, these institutions caused much searching of heart. They had failed to fulfil the expectations of their founders. Their rate of mortality was high, though their birth- rate was also high, and even in those that were comfortably established the membership was apt to fluctuate with alarming rapidity. To understand their position, it is necessary to glance back at their origins.
These institutions were started by Brougham and Birkbeck in the twenties at a time when, as a writer described it, “there still prevailed in many quarters a strong jealousy of any political discussion by the people, and still more of any society which proposed to assemble periodically several hundreds of the labouring classes”. Hence their founders, in their desire to conciliate opposition, banned political or religious discussion or books, and forbade newspapers. Even so, the St James’ Chronicle could say of the London Mechanics’ Institution in 1825, “A scheme more completely adapted for the destruction of this empire could not have been invented by the author of evil himself than that which the depraved ambition of some men, the vanity of others, and the supineness of a third and more important class, has so nearly perfected.” Even their advocates felt a certain need for apology: “I am at a loss,” said Sir Benjamin Heywood, President of the Manchester Mechanics’ Institution, in 1827, “to see how we are disturbing the proper station of the working classes, and giving them an undue elevation; we do not alter their relative position; a spirit of intellectual activity, unequalled in any age or country, now prevails amongst us, and, if the superstructure be renewed and strengthened, it does not seem fitting that the foundation should be neglected.”.
Mechanics’ Institutions were established in the hope of popularizing scientific knowledge, and incidentally making the workman better at his work. The latter motive at first received the chief emphasis. At Manchester, for example, the preamble declared that “this society was formed for the purpose of enabling Mechanics and Artizans of whatever trade they may be, to become acquainted with such branches of science as are of practical application in the exercise of that trade, that they may possess a more thorough knowledge of their business, acquire a greater degree of skill in the practice of it, and be qualified to make improvements and even new inventions in the Arts which they respectively profess.”.
1.
What comes closest to the meaning of ‘But though the figures sound impressive, these institutions caused much searching of heart.’? (Answer: e)
2.
(a) Although there were many books, the workmen were not reading enough of them.
3.
(b) More societies were needed.
4.
(c) They did not help workmen to work better.
5.
(d) More institutions closed down than opened up.
6.
(e) Their stability was unpredictable.
7.
The writers suggest that the founders of the Mechanics’ Institutions banned political or religious discussion or books, and forbade newspapers becauseAnswer: a)
8.
(a) They wanted to forestall criticism of the institutions
9.
(b) They did not want to encourage political upheaval
10.
(c) They wanted workmen to read improving books
11.
(d) They feared the destruction of the British empire
12.
(e) They wanted to encourage scientific knowledge
13.
What is the main argument made by Sir Benjamin Heywood in defence of Mechanics’ Institutions?(Answer: c)
14.
(a) They make the workman better at his work.
15.
(b) They help the working classes to improve their status.
16.
(c) They do not alter the relative position of the working classes.
17.
(d) They help renew the superstructure.
18.
(e) They make England greater than any other country.
19.
What comes closest to the meaning of ‘jealousy’ as used in the second paragraph?(Answer: b)
20.
(a) Envy
21.
(b) Suspicion
22.
(c) Disapproval
23.
(d) Fear
24.
(e) Resentment
25.
Thank you so much for all the help!!
One more last passage just before my test, really appreciate if someone could help and explain the rationale behind the right answers!
5 Mechanics’ Institutions
In practically every town of any size an intelligent workman who wanted to improve and educate himself would find by the forties a Mechanics’ Institution, or some similar society. In England, in 1850, it was estimated that there were seven hundred of these societies with 107,000 members. The libraries connected with them contained over 690,000 books. But though the figures sound impressive, these institutions caused much searching of heart. They had failed to fulfil the expectations of their founders. Their rate of mortality was high, though their birth- rate was also high, and even in those that were comfortably established the membership was apt to fluctuate with alarming rapidity. To understand their position, it is necessary to glance back at their origins.
These institutions were started by Brougham and Birkbeck in the twenties at a time when, as a writer described it, “there still prevailed in many quarters a strong jealousy of any political discussion by the people, and still more of any society which proposed to assemble periodically several hundreds of the labouring classes”. Hence their founders, in their desire to conciliate opposition, banned political or religious discussion or books, and forbade newspapers. Even so, the St James’ Chronicle could say of the London Mechanics’ Institution in 1825, “A scheme more completely adapted for the destruction of this empire could not have been invented by the author of evil himself than that which the depraved ambition of some men, the vanity of others, and the supineness of a third and more important class, has so nearly perfected.” Even their advocates felt a certain need for apology: “I am at a loss,” said Sir Benjamin Heywood, President of the Manchester Mechanics’ Institution, in 1827, “to see how we are disturbing the proper station of the working classes, and giving them an undue elevation; we do not alter their relative position; a spirit of intellectual activity, unequalled in any age or country, now prevails amongst us, and, if the superstructure be renewed and strengthened, it does not seem fitting that the foundation should be neglected.”.
Mechanics’ Institutions were established in the hope of popularizing scientific knowledge, and incidentally making the workman better at his work. The latter motive at first received the chief emphasis. At Manchester, for example, the preamble declared that “this society was formed for the purpose of enabling Mechanics and Artizans of whatever trade they may be, to become acquainted with such branches of science as are of practical application in the exercise of that trade, that they may possess a more thorough knowledge of their business, acquire a greater degree of skill in the practice of it, and be qualified to make improvements and even new inventions in the Arts which they respectively profess.”.
One more last passage just before my test, really appreciate if someone could help and explain the rationale behind the right answers!
5 Mechanics’ Institutions
In practically every town of any size an intelligent workman who wanted to improve and educate himself would find by the forties a Mechanics’ Institution, or some similar society. In England, in 1850, it was estimated that there were seven hundred of these societies with 107,000 members. The libraries connected with them contained over 690,000 books. But though the figures sound impressive, these institutions caused much searching of heart. They had failed to fulfil the expectations of their founders. Their rate of mortality was high, though their birth- rate was also high, and even in those that were comfortably established the membership was apt to fluctuate with alarming rapidity. To understand their position, it is necessary to glance back at their origins.
These institutions were started by Brougham and Birkbeck in the twenties at a time when, as a writer described it, “there still prevailed in many quarters a strong jealousy of any political discussion by the people, and still more of any society which proposed to assemble periodically several hundreds of the labouring classes”. Hence their founders, in their desire to conciliate opposition, banned political or religious discussion or books, and forbade newspapers. Even so, the St James’ Chronicle could say of the London Mechanics’ Institution in 1825, “A scheme more completely adapted for the destruction of this empire could not have been invented by the author of evil himself than that which the depraved ambition of some men, the vanity of others, and the supineness of a third and more important class, has so nearly perfected.” Even their advocates felt a certain need for apology: “I am at a loss,” said Sir Benjamin Heywood, President of the Manchester Mechanics’ Institution, in 1827, “to see how we are disturbing the proper station of the working classes, and giving them an undue elevation; we do not alter their relative position; a spirit of intellectual activity, unequalled in any age or country, now prevails amongst us, and, if the superstructure be renewed and strengthened, it does not seem fitting that the foundation should be neglected.”.
Mechanics’ Institutions were established in the hope of popularizing scientific knowledge, and incidentally making the workman better at his work. The latter motive at first received the chief emphasis. At Manchester, for example, the preamble declared that “this society was formed for the purpose of enabling Mechanics and Artizans of whatever trade they may be, to become acquainted with such branches of science as are of practical application in the exercise of that trade, that they may possess a more thorough knowledge of their business, acquire a greater degree of skill in the practice of it, and be qualified to make improvements and even new inventions in the Arts which they respectively profess.”.
1.
What comes closest to the meaning of ‘But though the figures sound impressive, these institutions caused much searching of heart.’? (Answer: e)
2.
(a) Although there were many books, the workmen were not reading enough of them.
3.
(b) More societies were needed.
4.
(c) They did not help workmen to work better.
5.
(d) More institutions closed down than opened up.
6.
(e) Their stability was unpredictable.
7.
The writers suggest that the founders of the Mechanics’ Institutions banned political or religious discussion or books, and forbade newspapers becauseAnswer: a)
8.
(a) They wanted to forestall criticism of the institutions
9.
(b) They did not want to encourage political upheaval
10.
(c) They wanted workmen to read improving books
11.
(d) They feared the destruction of the British empire
12.
(e) They wanted to encourage scientific knowledge
13.
What is the main argument made by Sir Benjamin Heywood in defence of Mechanics’ Institutions?(Answer: c)
14.
(a) They make the workman better at his work.
15.
(b) They help the working classes to improve their status.
16.
(c) They do not alter the relative position of the working classes.
17.
(d) They help renew the superstructure.
18.
(e) They make England greater than any other country.
19.
What comes closest to the meaning of ‘jealousy’ as used in the second paragraph?(Answer: b)
20.
(a) Envy
21.
(b) Suspicion
22.
(c) Disapproval
23.
(d) Fear
24.
(e) Resentment
25.
Original post by John.Willis
I notice 27 of you have seen my request, I really appreciate if any one of you could help by providing some guidance!
they're busy over at the Oxbridge section discussing about magic circles, training contracts and how Woolmington is actually a fantasy and nothing more
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Glasgow Common Law Offers 2024
- LNAT
- SOAS University of London Clearing 2023
- KCL we have not yet been able to download your LNAT results
- Uni help
- What other unis do I apply to with an interview at Cambridge for law?
- KCL, QMUL and UCl Law
- lnat resources
- Hi guys, sitting my LNAT
- glasgow university common law
- Law predicted A*AA 2023 entry
- LNAT
- What was everything you did to get into Bristol Law
- LNAT - only four answer options?
- How important is the LNAT score for Cambridge?
- LNAT preparation
- bristol law applicants 2024
- KCL Law
- LNAT exam
- Kcl law offer
