Set 8: Rhetorical Synthesis
Explanation
PASSAGE
A student is writing about counterfactual history. The student wants to defend its value as a method while acknowledging its limitations. Notes: - Counterfactuals explore 'what if' scenarios to understand causation. - They reveal which factors were truly decisive in historical outcomes. - Critics argue counterfactuals are unprovable speculation. - Careful counterfactuals constrain possibilities to plausible alternatives.
Which choice most effectively uses information from the notes to accomplish the student's goal?
Detailed Answer Explanation
This question asks you to effectively combine information to achieve a goal. The goal requires VALUE defense AND limitations acknowledgment. Causal insight (value), speculation critique (limitation), and constrained rigor (defense). The correct synthesis will use relevant details from the notes in a logical, purposeful way. Focus on what the question asks you to accomplish, then choose the answer that best achieves that goal using the provided information. Effective synthesis requires selecting and combining the most relevant information to achieve a specific purpose. Not all provided notes may be equally useful. Focus on what best accomplishes the stated goal while maintaining logical coherence.
Key Evidence:
• "defend its value as a method while acknowledging its limitations"
• "reveal which factors were truly decisive"
• "Critics argue counterfactuals are unprovable speculation"
• "Careful counterfactuals constrain possibilities"
Why others are wrong: D (Notes causation difficulty but not the counterfactual method.), B (Not in notes; mentions debate, not value/limitations.), A (Notes plausibility but doesn't defend value or acknowledge limitations.).
🎯 Keep Practicing!
Master all sections for your best SAT score