Text 1: Historian Dr. James Wright emphasizes the importance of primary sources. "Original documents, letters, and artifacts provide unfiltered access to historical events," Wright argues. "Secondary interpretations, no matter how scholarly, inevitably reflect the biases of their authors. Primary sources let history speak for itself."
Text 2: Historian Dr. Amelia Foster notes the limitations of primary sources. "Documents themselves carry biases—they were created by individuals with their own perspectives and agendas," Foster explains. "Without proper contextualization, primary sources can mislead as easily as inform. Historical understanding requires both sources and interpretation."
Which choice best describes how Foster's argument in Text 2 relates to Wright's position in Text 1?
It supports Wright's view by providing additional examples of primary sources
It challenges Wright's implication that primary sources are inherently objective
It expands Wright's argument to include digital archives
It questions whether historical research has any value
Correct Answer: B
Choice B is the correct answer. Wright implies primary sources provide "unfiltered access." Foster directly challenges this by noting documents "carry biases" from their creators.
- Evidence: Wright: "history speak for itself"; Foster: documents can "mislead as easily as inform."
- Reasoning: Foster disputes the notion that primary sources are bias-free.
- Conclusion: Foster challenges Wright's assumption of primary source objectivity.
Choice A is incorrect because Foster critiques, not supports, Wright's view. Choice C is incorrect because digital archives aren't mentioned. Choice D is incorrect because Foster values historical research with proper interpretation.