Set 1: Inferences (Advanced)
Explanation
PASSAGE
The dropping of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki remains one of history's most debated decisions. Proponents argue the bombs saved millions of lives by avoiding a land invasion; critics contend Japan was already seeking surrender, making the attacks unnecessary and primarily motivated by postwar power positioning against the Soviet Union.
What does the debate suggest about historical judgment?
Detailed Explanation
This question asks you to draw a logical conclusion from the text. Arguing about 'what would have happened' (invasion vs. surrender) and motives = counterfactual and contested. A valid inference must be supported by evidence in the passage, even if not stated directly. Look for clues in the text that strongly suggest the answer. Avoid conclusions that require assumptions beyond what's written. Valid inferences are strongly supported by multiple pieces of evidence in the text. Be cautious of choices that go too far beyond what the passage actually states. The best inference is the one most directly supported by textual evidence.
Key Evidence:
• "avoiding a land invasion"
• "Japan was already seeking surrender"
Why others are wrong: A (Proponents and critics disagree.), C (It 'remains one of history's most debated.'), D (The debate is about whether surrender was imminent, not achieved.).