Reading Comprehension GRE Practice Test 5

Q.1

PASSAGE:At the time Jane Austen’s novels were published – between 1811 and 1818 – English literature was not part of any academic curriculum. In addition, fiction was under strenuous attack. Certain religious and political groups felt novels had the power to make so called immoral characters so interesting young readers would identify with them; these groups also considered novels to be of little practical use. Even Cole-ridge, certainly no literary reactionary, spoke for many when he asserted that “novel-reading occasions the destruction of the mind’s power”. These attitudes towards novels help explain why Ausjten received little attention from early nineteenth century literary critics. (In any case, a novelist published anonymously, as Austin was, would not be likely to receive much critical attention). The literary response that was accorded her, however, was often as incisive as twentieth century criticism. In his attack in 1816 on novelistic portrayals “outside of ordinary experience, “ for example, Scott made an insightful remarks about the merits of Austen;’s fiction. Her novels, wrote Scott, “present to the reader an accurate and exact. picture of ordinary everyday people and places, reminiscent of seventeenth –century Flemish painting. “ Scott did not use the word “realistic probability in judging novels. The critic whitely did not use the word realism either, but he expressed agreement with Scott’s evaluation, and went on to suggest the possibilities for moral instruction in what we have called Austen’s realistic method. Her characters, wrote whitely, are persuasive agents for moral truth since they are ordinary persons “so clearly evoked that was feel an interest in their fate as if it were our own” Moral instruction, explained Whitely, is more likely to be effective when conveyed through recognizably human and interesting characters then when imparted by a sermonizing narrator. Whately especially praised Austen’s ability to create characters who “mingle goodness and villainy, weakness and virtue, as in life they are always mingled. “Whately concluded his remarks by comparing Austen’s art of characterization to Sicken’s, stating his preference for Austin’s. often anticipated the reservations of twentieth-century critics. An example of such a response was Lewes’ complaint in 1859 that Austen’s range of subjects and characters was too narrow. Praising her verisimilitude, Lewes added that nonetheless her focus was too often upon only the unlofty and the common place. (Twentieth-century Marxists, on the other hand, were to complain about what they saw as her exclusive emphasis on a lofty upper-middle class) in any case, having been rescued by some literary critics from neglect and indeed gradually lionized by them, Austen’s steadily reached, by the mid-nineteenth century, the enviable pinnacle of being considered controversial.

The primary purpose of the passage is to

A. demonstrate the nineteenth-century preference for realistic novels rather than romantic ones.
B. Explain why Jane Austen’s novels were not included in any academic curriculum in the early nineteenth century
C. Urge a reassessment of Jane Austen’s novels by twentieth-century literary critics
D. Describe some of the responses of nineteenth – century critics tol Jane Austen’s novels as well as to fiction in general
E. Argue that realistic character portrayal is the novelist’s most difficult task as well as the aspect of novel most likely to elicit critical response.
Answer: D

Q.2

PASSAGE:At the time Jane Austen’s novels were published – between 1811 and 1818 – English literature was not part of any academic curriculum. In addition, fiction was under strenuous attack. Certain religious and political groups felt novels had the power to make so called immoral characters so interesting young readers would identify with them; these groups also considered novels to be of little practical use. Even Cole-ridge, certainly no literary reactionary, spoke for many when he asserted that “novel-reading occasions the destruction of the mind’s power”. These attitudes towards novels help explain why Ausjten received little attention from early nineteenth century literary critics. (In any case, a novelist published anonymously, as Austin was, would not be likely to receive much critical attention). The literary response that was accorded her, however, was often as incisive as twentieth century criticism. In his attack in 1816 on novelistic portrayals “outside of ordinary experience, “ for example, Scott made an insightful remarks about the merits of Austen;’s fiction. Her novels, wrote Scott, “present to the reader an accurate and exact. picture of ordinary everyday people and places, reminiscent of seventeenth –century Flemish painting. “ Scott did not use the word “realistic probability in judging novels. The critic whitely did not use the word realism either, but he expressed agreement with Scott’s evaluation, and went on to suggest the possibilities for moral instruction in what we have called Austen’s realistic method. Her characters, wrote whitely, are persuasive agents for moral truth since they are ordinary persons “so clearly evoked that was feel an interest in their fate as if it were our own” Moral instruction, explained Whitely, is more likely to be effective when conveyed through recognizably human and interesting characters then when imparted by a sermonizing narrator. Whately especially praised Austen’s ability to create characters who “mingle goodness and villainy, weakness and virtue, as in life they are always mingled. “Whately concluded his remarks by comparing Austen’s art of characterization to Sicken’s, stating his preference for Austin’s. often anticipated the reservations of twentieth-century critics. An example of such a response was Lewes’ complaint in 1859 that Austen’s range of subjects and characters was too narrow. Praising her verisimilitude, Lewes added that nonetheless her focus was too often upon only the unlofty and the common place. (Twentieth-century Marxists, on the other hand, were to complain about what they saw as her exclusive emphasis on a lofty upper-middle class) in any case, having been rescued by some literary critics from neglect and indeed gradually lionized by them, Austen’s steadily reached, by the mid-nineteenth century, the enviable pinnacle of being considered controversial.

The passage supplies information for answering which of the following questions?

A. Ws Whately aware of Scott’s remarks about Jane Austen’s novels?
B. Who is an example of a twentieth-century Marxist critic?
C. Who is an example of twentieth-century critic who admired Jane Aujsten’s novels?
D. What is the author’s judgment of Dickens?
E. Did Jane Austen’s express her opinion of those nineteenth-century critics who admired her novels.
Answer: A

Q.3

PASSAGE:At the time Jane Austen’s novels were published – between 1811 and 1818 – English literature was not part of any academic curriculum. In addition, fiction was under strenuous attack. Certain religious and political groups felt novels had the power to make so called immoral characters so interesting young readers would identify with them; these groups also considered novels to be of little practical use. Even Cole-ridge, certainly no literary reactionary, spoke for many when he asserted that “novel-reading occasions the destruction of the mind’s power”. These attitudes towards novels help explain why Ausjten received little attention from early nineteenth century literary critics. (In any case, a novelist published anonymously, as Austin was, would not be likely to receive much critical attention). The literary response that was accorded her, however, was often as incisive as twentieth century criticism. In his attack in 1816 on novelistic portrayals “outside of ordinary experience, “ for example, Scott made an insightful remarks about the merits of Austen;’s fiction. Her novels, wrote Scott, “present to the reader an accurate and exact. picture of ordinary everyday people and places, reminiscent of seventeenth –century Flemish painting. “ Scott did not use the word “realistic probability in judging novels. The critic whitely did not use the word realism either, but he expressed agreement with Scott’s evaluation, and went on to suggest the possibilities for moral instruction in what we have called Austen’s realistic method. Her characters, wrote whitely, are persuasive agents for moral truth since they are ordinary persons “so clearly evoked that was feel an interest in their fate as if it were our own” Moral instruction, explained Whitely, is more likely to be effective when conveyed through recognizably human and interesting characters then when imparted by a sermonizing narrator. Whately especially praised Austen’s ability to create characters who “mingle goodness and villainy, weakness and virtue, as in life they are always mingled. “Whately concluded his remarks by comparing Austen’s art of characterization to Sicken’s, stating his preference for Austin’s. often anticipated the reservations of twentieth-century critics. An example of such a response was Lewes’ complaint in 1859 that Austen’s range of subjects and characters was too narrow. Praising her verisimilitude, Lewes added that nonetheless her focus was too often upon only the unlofty and the common place. (Twentieth-century Marxists, on the other hand, were to complain about what they saw as her exclusive emphasis on a lofty upper-middle class) in any case, having been rescued by some literary critics from neglect and indeed gradually lionized by them, Austen’s steadily reached, by the mid-nineteenth century, the enviable pinnacle of being considered controversial.

The authors mentions that English literature “was” not part of any academic curriculum “ in the early nineteenth century in order to

A. emphasize the need for Jane Austen to increate ordinary, everyday character in her novels.
B. give support to those religious and political groups that had attacked fiction
C. give one reason why Jane Austen’s novels received little critical attention in the early nineteenth century.
D. Suggest the superiority of an informal and unsystematized approach to the study of literature
E. contrast nineteenth-century attitudes towards English literature with those towards classical literature
Answer: C

Q.4

PASSAGE:At the time Jane Austen’s novels were published – between 1811 and 1818 – English literature was not part of any academic curriculum. In addition, fiction was under strenuous attack. Certain religious and political groups felt novels had the power to make so called immoral characters so interesting young readers would identify with them; these groups also considered novels to be of little practical use. Even Cole-ridge, certainly no literary reactionary, spoke for many when he asserted that “novel-reading occasions the destruction of the mind’s power”. These attitudes towards novels help explain why Ausjten received little attention from early nineteenth century literary critics. (In any case, a novelist published anonymously, as Austin was, would not be likely to receive much critical attention). The literary response that was accorded her, however, was often as incisive as twentieth century criticism. In his attack in 1816 on novelistic portrayals “outside of ordinary experience, “ for example, Scott made an insightful remarks about the merits of Austen;’s fiction. Her novels, wrote Scott, “present to the reader an accurate and exact. picture of ordinary everyday people and places, reminiscent of seventeenth –century Flemish painting. “ Scott did not use the word “realistic probability in judging novels. The critic whitely did not use the word realism either, but he expressed agreement with Scott’s evaluation, and went on to suggest the possibilities for moral instruction in what we have called Austen’s realistic method. Her characters, wrote whitely, are persuasive agents for moral truth since they are ordinary persons “so clearly evoked that was feel an interest in their fate as if it were our own” Moral instruction, explained Whitely, is more likely to be effective when conveyed through recognizably human and interesting characters then when imparted by a sermonizing narrator. Whately especially praised Austen’s ability to create characters who “mingle goodness and villainy, weakness and virtue, as in life they are always mingled. “Whately concluded his remarks by comparing Austen’s art of characterization to Sicken’s, stating his preference for Austin’s. often anticipated the reservations of twentieth-century critics. An example of such a response was Lewes’ complaint in 1859 that Austen’s range of subjects and characters was too narrow. Praising her verisimilitude, Lewes added that nonetheless her focus was too often upon only the unlofty and the common place. (Twentieth-century Marxists, on the other hand, were to complain about what they saw as her exclusive emphasis on a lofty upper-middle class) in any case, having been rescued by some literary critics from neglect and indeed gradually lionized by them, Austen’s steadily reached, by the mid-nineteenth century, the enviable pinnacle of being considered controversial.

The passage supplies information to suggest that the religious and political groups mentioned and Whately might have agreed that a novel

A. has little practical use
B. has the ability to influence the moral values of its readers
C. is of most interest to readers when representing ordinary human characters.
D. should not be read by young readers.
E. Needs the sermonizing of a narrator in order to impart moral truths
Answer: B

Q.5

PASSAGE:At the time Jane Austen’s novels were published – between 1811 and 1818 – English literature was not part of any academic curriculum. In addition, fiction was under strenuous attack. Certain religious and political groups felt novels had the power to make so called immoral characters so interesting young readers would identify with them; these groups also considered novels to be of little practical use. Even Cole-ridge, certainly no literary reactionary, spoke for many when he asserted that “novel-reading occasions the destruction of the mind’s power”. These attitudes towards novels help explain why Ausjten received little attention from early nineteenth century literary critics. (In any case, a novelist published anonymously, as Austin was, would not be likely to receive much critical attention). The literary response that was accorded her, however, was often as incisive as twentieth century criticism. In his attack in 1816 on novelistic portrayals “outside of ordinary experience, “ for example, Scott made an insightful remarks about the merits of Austen;’s fiction. Her novels, wrote Scott, “present to the reader an accurate and exact. picture of ordinary everyday people and places, reminiscent of seventeenth –century Flemish painting. “ Scott did not use the word “realistic probability in judging novels. The critic whitely did not use the word realism either, but he expressed agreement with Scott’s evaluation, and went on to suggest the possibilities for moral instruction in what we have called Austen’s realistic method. Her characters, wrote whitely, are persuasive agents for moral truth since they are ordinary persons “so clearly evoked that was feel an interest in their fate as if it were our own” Moral instruction, explained Whitely, is more likely to be effective when conveyed through recognizably human and interesting characters then when imparted by a sermonizing narrator. Whately especially praised Austen’s ability to create characters who “mingle goodness and villainy, weakness and virtue, as in life they are always mingled. “Whately concluded his remarks by comparing Austen’s art of characterization to Sicken’s, stating his preference for Austin’s. often anticipated the reservations of twentieth-century critics. An example of such a response was Lewes’ complaint in 1859 that Austen’s range of subjects and characters was too narrow. Praising her verisimilitude, Lewes added that nonetheless her focus was too often upon only the unlofty and the common place. (Twentieth-century Marxists, on the other hand, were to complain about what they saw as her exclusive emphasis on a lofty upper-middle class) in any case, having been rescued by some literary critics from neglect and indeed gradually lionized by them, Austen’s steadily reached, by the mid-nineteenth century, the enviable pinnacle of being considered controversial.

The author quotes Coleridge in order to

A. refute the literary opinions of certain religious and political groups
B. make a case for the inferiority of novels to poetry
C. give an example of a writer who was not a literary reactionary
D. illustrate the early nineteenth-century belief that fiction was especially appealing to young readers
E. indicate how widespread was the attack on novels in the early nineteenth century
Answer: E

Q.6

PASSAGE:At the time Jane Austen’s novels were published – between 1811 and 1818 – English literature was not part of any academic curriculum. In addition, fiction was under strenuous attack. Certain religious and political groups felt novels had the power to make so called immoral characters so interesting young readers would identify with them; these groups also considered novels to be of little practical use. Even Cole-ridge, certainly no literary reactionary, spoke for many when he asserted that “novel-reading occasions the destruction of the mind’s power”. These attitudes towards novels help explain why Ausjten received little attention from early nineteenth century literary critics. (In any case, a novelist published anonymously, as Austin was, would not be likely to receive much critical attention). The literary response that was accorded her, however, was often as incisive as twentieth century criticism. In his attack in 1816 on novelistic portrayals “outside of ordinary experience, “ for example, Scott made an insightful remarks about the merits of Austen;’s fiction. Her novels, wrote Scott, “present to the reader an accurate and exact. picture of ordinary everyday people and places, reminiscent of seventeenth –century Flemish painting. “ Scott did not use the word “realistic probability in judging novels. The critic whitely did not use the word realism either, but he expressed agreement with Scott’s evaluation, and went on to suggest the possibilities for moral instruction in what we have called Austen’s realistic method. Her characters, wrote whitely, are persuasive agents for moral truth since they are ordinary persons “so clearly evoked that was feel an interest in their fate as if it were our own” Moral instruction, explained Whitely, is more likely to be effective when conveyed through recognizably human and interesting characters then when imparted by a sermonizing narrator. Whately especially praised Austen’s ability to create characters who “mingle goodness and villainy, weakness and virtue, as in life they are always mingled. “Whately concluded his remarks by comparing Austen’s art of characterization to Sicken’s, stating his preference for Austin’s. often anticipated the reservations of twentieth-century critics. An example of such a response was Lewes’ complaint in 1859 that Austen’s range of subjects and characters was too narrow. Praising her verisimilitude, Lewes added that nonetheless her focus was too often upon only the unlofty and the common place. (Twentieth-century Marxists, on the other hand, were to complain about what they saw as her exclusive emphasis on a lofty upper-middle class) in any case, having been rescued by some literary critics from neglect and indeed gradually lionized by them, Austen’s steadily reached, by the mid-nineteenth century, the enviable pinnacle of being considered controversial.

The passage suggests that twentieth century Marxists would have admired Jane Austen’s noels more if the novels, a he Marxists understood them, had

A. described the values of upper-middle class society
B. avoided moral instruction and sermonizing
C. depicted ordinary society in a more flattering light portrayed characters from more than one class of society
D. portrayed characters from more than one class of society
E. anticipated some of controversial social problems of the twentieth century.
Answer: D

Q.7

PASSAGE:At the time Jane Austen’s novels were published – between 1811 and 1818 – English literature was not part of any academic curriculum. In addition, fiction was under strenuous attack. Certain religious and political groups felt novels had the power to make so called immoral characters so interesting young readers would identify with them; these groups also considered novels to be of little practical use. Even Cole-ridge, certainly no literary reactionary, spoke for many when he asserted that “novel-reading occasions the destruction of the mind’s power”. These attitudes towards novels help explain why Ausjten received little attention from early nineteenth century literary critics. (In any case, a novelist published anonymously, as Austin was, would not be likely to receive much critical attention). The literary response that was accorded her, however, was often as incisive as twentieth century criticism. In his attack in 1816 on novelistic portrayals “outside of ordinary experience, “ for example, Scott made an insightful remarks about the merits of Austen;’s fiction. Her novels, wrote Scott, “present to the reader an accurate and exact. picture of ordinary everyday people and places, reminiscent of seventeenth –century Flemish painting. “ Scott did not use the word “realistic probability in judging novels. The critic whitely did not use the word realism either, but he expressed agreement with Scott’s evaluation, and went on to suggest the possibilities for moral instruction in what we have called Austen’s realistic method. Her characters, wrote whitely, are persuasive agents for moral truth since they are ordinary persons “so clearly evoked that was feel an interest in their fate as if it were our own” Moral instruction, explained Whitely, is more likely to be effective when conveyed through recognizably human and interesting characters then when imparted by a sermonizing narrator. Whately especially praised Austen’s ability to create characters who “mingle goodness and villainy, weakness and virtue, as in life they are always mingled. “Whately concluded his remarks by comparing Austen’s art of characterization to Sicken’s, stating his preference for Austin’s. often anticipated the reservations of twentieth-century critics. An example of such a response was Lewes’ complaint in 1859 that Austen’s range of subjects and characters was too narrow. Praising her verisimilitude, Lewes added that nonetheless her focus was too often upon only the unlofty and the common place. (Twentieth-century Marxists, on the other hand, were to complain about what they saw as her exclusive emphasis on a lofty upper-middle class) in any case, having been rescued by some literary critics from neglect and indeed gradually lionized by them, Austen’s steadily reached, by the mid-nineteenth century, the enviable pinnacle of being considered controversial.

It can be inferred from the passage that Whately found Dickens character to be

A. especially interest to you readers
B. ordinary persons in recognizably human situations
C. less liable than Jane Aujten’s characters to have a realistic mixture of moral qualities
D. more often villainous and week than virtuous and good
E. less susceptible than Jane Austen’s characters to the m oral judgments of sermonizing narrator.
Answer: C

Q.8

PASSAGE:At the time Jane Austen’s novels were published – between 1811 and 1818 – English literature was not part of any academic curriculum. In addition, fiction was under strenuous attack. Certain religious and political groups felt novels had the power to make so called immoral characters so interesting young readers would identify with them; these groups also considered novels to be of little practical use. Even Cole-ridge, certainly no literary reactionary, spoke for many when he asserted that “novel-reading occasions the destruction of the mind’s power”. These attitudes towards novels help explain why Ausjten received little attention from early nineteenth century literary critics. (In any case, a novelist published anonymously, as Austin was, would not be likely to receive much critical attention). The literary response that was accorded her, however, was often as incisive as twentieth century criticism. In his attack in 1816 on novelistic portrayals “outside of ordinary experience, “ for example, Scott made an insightful remarks about the merits of Austen;’s fiction. Her novels, wrote Scott, “present to the reader an accurate and exact. picture of ordinary everyday people and places, reminiscent of seventeenth –century Flemish painting. “ Scott did not use the word “realistic probability in judging novels. The critic whitely did not use the word realism either, but he expressed agreement with Scott’s evaluation, and went on to suggest the possibilities for moral instruction in what we have called Austen’s realistic method. Her characters, wrote whitely, are persuasive agents for moral truth since they are ordinary persons “so clearly evoked that was feel an interest in their fate as if it were our own” Moral instruction, explained Whitely, is more likely to be effective when conveyed through recognizably human and interesting characters then when imparted by a sermonizing narrator. Whately especially praised Austen’s ability to create characters who “mingle goodness and villainy, weakness and virtue, as in life they are always mingled. “Whately concluded his remarks by comparing Austen’s art of characterization to Sicken’s, stating his preference for Austin’s. often anticipated the reservations of twentieth-century critics. An example of such a response was Lewes’ complaint in 1859 that Austen’s range of subjects and characters was too narrow. Praising her verisimilitude, Lewes added that nonetheless her focus was too often upon only the unlofty and the common place. (Twentieth-century Marxists, on the other hand, were to complain about what they saw as her exclusive emphasis on a lofty upper-middle class) in any case, having been rescued by some literary critics from neglect and indeed gradually lionized by them, Austen’s steadily reached, by the mid-nineteenth century, the enviable pinnacle of being considered controversial.

According to the passage, the lack of critical attention paid to Jane Austen can be explained by all of the following nineteenth-century attitudes towards the novel EXCEPT the

A. assurance felt by many people that novels weakened the mind
B. certainly shared by many political commentators that the range of novels was too narrow
C. lack of interest shown by some critics in novels that were published anonymously
D. fear exhibited by some religious and political groups that novels had the power to portray immoral characters attractively
E. belief held by some religious and political groups that novels had no practical value.
Answer: B

Q.9

PASSAGE:At the time Jane Austen’s novels were published – between 1811 and 1818 – English literature was not part of any academic curriculum. In addition, fiction was under strenuous attack. Certain religious and political groups felt novels had the power to make so called immoral characters so interesting young readers would identify with them; these groups also considered novels to be of little practical use. Even Cole-ridge, certainly no literary reactionary, spoke for many when he asserted that “novel-reading occasions the destruction of the mind’s power”. These attitudes towards novels help explain why Ausjten received little attention from early nineteenth century literary critics. (In any case, a novelist published anonymously, as Austin was, would not be likely to receive much critical attention). The literary response that was accorded her, however, was often as incisive as twentieth century criticism. In his attack in 1816 on novelistic portrayals “outside of ordinary experience, “ for example, Scott made an insightful remarks about the merits of Austen;’s fiction. Her novels, wrote Scott, “present to the reader an accurate and exact. picture of ordinary everyday people and places, reminiscent of seventeenth –century Flemish painting. “ Scott did not use the word “realistic probability in judging novels. The critic whitely did not use the word realism either, but he expressed agreement with Scott’s evaluation, and went on to suggest the possibilities for moral instruction in what we have called Austen’s realistic method. Her characters, wrote whitely, are persuasive agents for moral truth since they are ordinary persons “so clearly evoked that was feel an interest in their fate as if it were our own” Moral instruction, explained Whitely, is more likely to be effective when conveyed through recognizably human and interesting characters then when imparted by a sermonizing narrator. Whately especially praised Austen’s ability to create characters who “mingle goodness and villainy, weakness and virtue, as in life they are always mingled. “Whately concluded his remarks by comparing Austen’s art of characterization to Sicken’s, stating his preference for Austin’s. often anticipated the reservations of twentieth-century critics. An example of such a response was Lewes’ complaint in 1859 that Austen’s range of subjects and characters was too narrow. Praising her verisimilitude, Lewes added that nonetheless her focus was too often upon only the unlofty and the common place. (Twentieth-century Marxists, on the other hand, were to complain about what they saw as her exclusive emphasis on a lofty upper-middle class) in any case, having been rescued by some literary critics from neglect and indeed gradually lionized by them, Austen’s steadily reached, by the mid-nineteenth century, the enviable pinnacle of being considered controversial.

The author would most likely agree that which of the following ios the best measure of a writer’s literary success?

A. Inclusion of the writer’s work in an academic curriculum
B. Publication of the writer’s work in the writer’s own name
C. Existence of debate among critics about the writers work
D. Praise of the writers work by religious and political groups
E. Ability of the writers work to appeal to ordinary people.
Answer: C

Q.10

PASSAGE:Despite their many differences of temperament and of literary perspective, Emerson, Thoreau, Hawthorne, Melville, and Whitman share certain beliefs. Common to all these writers is their humanistic perspective. Its basic premises are that humans are the spiritual center of the universe and that in them alone is the clue of the nature, history and ultimately the cosmos itself. Without denying outright the existenced either of a deity or of brute matter, this perspective nevertheless rejects them as exclusive principles of interpretation and prefers to explain humans and the world in terms of humanity itself. This preference is expressed most clearly in the Transcendentalist principle that the structure of the universe literally duplicates the structure of the individual self: therefore, all knowledge begins with self-knowledge. This common perspective is almost always universalized. Its emphasis is not upon the individual as a particular European or American, but upon the hyuman as universal, freed from the accidents of time, space, birth and talent. Thus, for Emerson, the “American Scholar” turns out to be simply “Main Tinking”; while, for Whitman, the “Song of Myself” merges imperceptibly into a song of all the “children of Adam:,” where “every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you.” Also common to all five writers is the belief that individual virtue and happiness depends upon the self-realization, which, in turn, depend upon the harmonious reconciliation of two universal psychological tendencies: first, the self-asserting impulse of the individual to withdraw; to remain unique and separate, and to be responsible only to himself or herself, and second, the self-transcending impulse of the individual to embrace the whole world in the experience of a single moment and to know and become one with that world. These conflicting impulses can be seen in the democratic ethic. Democracy advocates individualism, he preservation of the individual’s free-dom and self-expression. But the democratic self is torn between the duty to self, which is implied by the concept of liberty, and the duty to society, which is implied by the concept of equality and fraternity. A third assumption common to the five writers is that intuition and imagination offer a surer road to truth than does abstract logic or scientific method. It is illustrated by their emphasis upon the introspection-their belief that the clue to external nature is to be found in the inner world of individual psychology and by their interpretation of experience as, in essence, symbolic. Both these stresses presume an organic relationship between the self and the cosmos of which only intuition and imagination can properly take account. These writers’ faith in the imagination and in themselves as practitioners of imagination led them conceive of the writer as a seer and enabled them to achieve supreme confidence in their own moral and metaphysical insights.

The author’s discussion of Emerson, Thoreau, Hawthorne, Melville, and Whitman is primarily concerned with explaining.

A. some of their beliefs about the difficulties involved in self-realization
B. some of their beliefs concerning the world and the place that humanity occupies in the universal order
C. some of their beliefs concerning the relationship between humanism and democracy
D. the way some of their beliefs are shaped by differences in temperament and literary outlook.
E. the effects of some of their beliefs on their writings
Answer: B

Q.11

PASSAGE:Despite their many differences of temperament and of literary perspective, Emerson, Thoreau, Hawthorne, Melville, and Whitman share certain beliefs. Common to all these writers is their humanistic perspective. Its basic premises are that humans are the spiritual center of the universe and that in them alone is the clue of the nature, history and ultimately the cosmos itself. Without denying outright the existenced either of a deity or of brute matter, this perspective nevertheless rejects them as exclusive principles of interpretation and prefers to explain humans and the world in terms of humanity itself. This preference is expressed most clearly in the Transcendentalist principle that the structure of the universe literally duplicates the structure of the individual self: therefore, all knowledge begins with self-knowledge. This common perspective is almost always universalized. Its emphasis is not upon the individual as a particular European or American, but upon the hyuman as universal, freed from the accidents of time, space, birth and talent. Thus, for Emerson, the “American Scholar” turns out to be simply “Main Tinking”; while, for Whitman, the “Song of Myself” merges imperceptibly into a song of all the “children of Adam:,” where “every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you.” Also common to all five writers is the belief that individual virtue and happiness depends upon the self-realization, which, in turn, depend upon the harmonious reconciliation of two universal psychological tendencies: first, the self-asserting impulse of the individual to withdraw; to remain unique and separate, and to be responsible only to himself or herself, and second, the self-transcending impulse of the individual to embrace the whole world in the experience of a single moment and to know and become one with that world. These conflicting impulses can be seen in the democratic ethic. Democracy advocates individualism, he preservation of the individual’s free-dom and self-expression. But the democratic self is torn between the duty to self, which is implied by the concept of liberty, and the duty to society, which is implied by the concept of equality and fraternity. A third assumption common to the five writers is that intuition and imagination offer a surer road to truth than does abstract logic or scientific method. It is illustrated by their emphasis upon the introspection-their belief that the clue to external nature is to be found in the inner world of individual psychology and by their interpretation of experience as, in essence, symbolic. Both these stresses presume an organic relationship between the self and the cosmos of which only intuition and imagination can properly take account. These writers’ faith in the imagination and in themselves as practitioners of imagination led them conceive of the writer as a seer and enabled them to achieve supreme confidence in their own moral and metaphysical insights.

According to the passage, the humanistic perspective of the five writers presupposes which of the following?
I)The structures of the universe can be discovered through self-knowledge.
II)The world can be explained in terms of humanity
III)The spiritual and the material worlds are incompatible

A. I only
B. II only
C. I and II only
D. II and III only
E. I, II and III
Answer: C

Q.12

PASSAGE:Despite their many differences of temperament and of literary perspective, Emerson, Thoreau, Hawthorne, Melville, and Whitman share certain beliefs. Common to all these writers is their humanistic perspective. Its basic premises are that humans are the spiritual center of the universe and that in them alone is the clue of the nature, history and ultimately the cosmos itself. Without denying outright the existenced either of a deity or of brute matter, this perspective nevertheless rejects them as exclusive principles of interpretation and prefers to explain humans and the world in terms of humanity itself. This preference is expressed most clearly in the Transcendentalist principle that the structure of the universe literally duplicates the structure of the individual self: therefore, all knowledge begins with self-knowledge. This common perspective is almost always universalized. Its emphasis is not upon the individual as a particular European or American, but upon the hyuman as universal, freed from the accidents of time, space, birth and talent. Thus, for Emerson, the “American Scholar” turns out to be simply “Main Tinking”; while, for Whitman, the “Song of Myself” merges imperceptibly into a song of all the “children of Adam:,” where “every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you.” Also common to all five writers is the belief that individual virtue and happiness depends upon the self-realization, which, in turn, depend upon the harmonious reconciliation of two universal psychological tendencies: first, the self-asserting impulse of the individual to withdraw; to remain unique and separate, and to be responsible only to himself or herself, and second, the self-transcending impulse of the individual to embrace the whole world in the experience of a single moment and to know and become one with that world. These conflicting impulses can be seen in the democratic ethic. Democracy advocates individualism, he preservation of the individual’s free-dom and self-expression. But the democratic self is torn between the duty to self, which is implied by the concept of liberty, and the duty to society, which is implied by the concept of equality and fraternity. A third assumption common to the five writers is that intuition and imagination offer a surer road to truth than does abstract logic or scientific method. It is illustrated by their emphasis upon the introspection-their belief that the clue to external nature is to be found in the inner world of individual psychology and by their interpretation of experience as, in essence, symbolic. Both these stresses presume an organic relationship between the self and the cosmos of which only intuition and imagination can properly take account. These writers’ faith in the imagination and in themselves as practitioners of imagination led them conceive of the writer as a seer and enabled them to achieve supreme confidence in their own moral and metaphysical insights.

The authors quotes Whiteman primarily in order to

A. show that the poet not agree with Emerson
B. indicate the way the poet uses the humanists ideal to praise himself
C. suggest that the poet adapts the basis premises of humanism to his own individual outlook on the world
D. illustrate a way the poet expresses the relationship of the individual to the humanistic universe
E. demonstrate that the poet is concerned with the well being of all humans
Answer: D

Q.13

PASSAGE:Despite their many differences of temperament and of literary perspective, Emerson, Thoreau, Hawthorne, Melville, and Whitman share certain beliefs. Common to all these writers is their humanistic perspective. Its basic premises are that humans are the spiritual center of the universe and that in them alone is the clue of the nature, history and ultimately the cosmos itself. Without denying outright the existenced either of a deity or of brute matter, this perspective nevertheless rejects them as exclusive principles of interpretation and prefers to explain humans and the world in terms of humanity itself. This preference is expressed most clearly in the Transcendentalist principle that the structure of the universe literally duplicates the structure of the individual self: therefore, all knowledge begins with self-knowledge. This common perspective is almost always universalized. Its emphasis is not upon the individual as a particular European or American, but upon the hyuman as universal, freed from the accidents of time, space, birth and talent. Thus, for Emerson, the “American Scholar” turns out to be simply “Main Tinking”; while, for Whitman, the “Song of Myself” merges imperceptibly into a song of all the “children of Adam:,” where “every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you.” Also common to all five writers is the belief that individual virtue and happiness depends upon the self-realization, which, in turn, depend upon the harmonious reconciliation of two universal psychological tendencies: first, the self-asserting impulse of the individual to withdraw; to remain unique and separate, and to be responsible only to himself or herself, and second, the self-transcending impulse of the individual to embrace the whole world in the experience of a single moment and to know and become one with that world. These conflicting impulses can be seen in the democratic ethic. Democracy advocates individualism, he preservation of the individual’s free-dom and self-expression. But the democratic self is torn between the duty to self, which is implied by the concept of liberty, and the duty to society, which is implied by the concept of equality and fraternity. A third assumption common to the five writers is that intuition and imagination offer a surer road to truth than does abstract logic or scientific method. It is illustrated by their emphasis upon the introspection-their belief that the clue to external nature is to be found in the inner world of individual psychology and by their interpretation of experience as, in essence, symbolic. Both these stresses presume an organic relationship between the self and the cosmos of which only intuition and imagination can properly take account. These writers’ faith in the imagination and in themselves as practitioners of imagination led them conceive of the writer as a seer and enabled them to achieve supreme confidence in their own moral and metaphysical insights.

According to the passage, the five writers objects to the scientific method primarily because they think it

A. is not the best way to obtain an understanding of the relationship between the individual and the cosmos
B. is so specialized that it leads to an understanding of separate parts of the universe but not of the relationships among those parts
C. cannot provide an adequate explanation of intuition and imagination
D. misleads people into believing they have an understanding of truth, when they do not
E. prevents people from recognizing the symbolic nature of experience.
Answer: A

Q.14

PASSAGE:Despite their many differences of temperament and of literary perspective, Emerson, Thoreau, Hawthorne, Melville, and Whitman share certain beliefs. Common to all these writers is their humanistic perspective. Its basic premises are that humans are the spiritual center of the universe and that in them alone is the clue of the nature, history and ultimately the cosmos itself. Without denying outright the existenced either of a deity or of brute matter, this perspective nevertheless rejects them as exclusive principles of interpretation and prefers to explain humans and the world in terms of humanity itself. This preference is expressed most clearly in the Transcendentalist principle that the structure of the universe literally duplicates the structure of the individual self: therefore, all knowledge begins with self-knowledge. This common perspective is almost always universalized. Its emphasis is not upon the individual as a particular European or American, but upon the hyuman as universal, freed from the accidents of time, space, birth and talent. Thus, for Emerson, the “American Scholar” turns out to be simply “Main Tinking”; while, for Whitman, the “Song of Myself” merges imperceptibly into a song of all the “children of Adam:,” where “every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you.” Also common to all five writers is the belief that individual virtue and happiness depends upon the self-realization, which, in turn, depend upon the harmonious reconciliation of two universal psychological tendencies: first, the self-asserting impulse of the individual to withdraw; to remain unique and separate, and to be responsible only to himself or herself, and second, the self-transcending impulse of the individual to embrace the whole world in the experience of a single moment and to know and become one with that world. These conflicting impulses can be seen in the democratic ethic. Democracy advocates individualism, he preservation of the individual’s free-dom and self-expression. But the democratic self is torn between the duty to self, which is implied by the concept of liberty, and the duty to society, which is implied by the concept of equality and fraternity. A third assumption common to the five writers is that intuition and imagination offer a surer road to truth than does abstract logic or scientific method. It is illustrated by their emphasis upon the introspection-their belief that the clue to external nature is to be found in the inner world of individual psychology and by their interpretation of experience as, in essence, symbolic. Both these stresses presume an organic relationship between the self and the cosmos of which only intuition and imagination can properly take account. These writers’ faith in the imagination and in themselves as practitioners of imagination led them conceive of the writer as a seer and enabled them to achieve supreme confidence in their own moral and metaphysical insights.

It can be inferred that intuition is important to the five writers primarily because it provides them with

A. information useful for understanding abstract logic and scientific method
B. the discipline needed in the search for truth
C. inspiration for their best writing
D. clues to the interpretation of symbolic experience
E. the means of resolving conflicts between the self and the world
Answer: D

Q.15

PASSAGE:Despite their many differences of temperament and of literary perspective, Emerson, Thoreau, Hawthorne, Melville, and Whitman share certain beliefs. Common to all these writers is their humanistic perspective. Its basic premises are that humans are the spiritual center of the universe and that in them alone is the clue of the nature, history and ultimately the cosmos itself. Without denying outright the existenced either of a deity or of brute matter, this perspective nevertheless rejects them as exclusive principles of interpretation and prefers to explain humans and the world in terms of humanity itself. This preference is expressed most clearly in the Transcendentalist principle that the structure of the universe literally duplicates the structure of the individual self: therefore, all knowledge begins with self-knowledge. This common perspective is almost always universalized. Its emphasis is not upon the individual as a particular European or American, but upon the hyuman as universal, freed from the accidents of time, space, birth and talent. Thus, for Emerson, the “American Scholar” turns out to be simply “Main Tinking”; while, for Whitman, the “Song of Myself” merges imperceptibly into a song of all the “children of Adam:,” where “every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you.” Also common to all five writers is the belief that individual virtue and happiness depends upon the self-realization, which, in turn, depend upon the harmonious reconciliation of two universal psychological tendencies: first, the self-asserting impulse of the individual to withdraw; to remain unique and separate, and to be responsible only to himself or herself, and second, the self-transcending impulse of the individual to embrace the whole world in the experience of a single moment and to know and become one with that world. These conflicting impulses can be seen in the democratic ethic. Democracy advocates individualism, he preservation of the individual’s free-dom and self-expression. But the democratic self is torn between the duty to self, which is implied by the concept of liberty, and the duty to society, which is implied by the concept of equality and fraternity. A third assumption common to the five writers is that intuition and imagination offer a surer road to truth than does abstract logic or scientific method. It is illustrated by their emphasis upon the introspection-their belief that the clue to external nature is to be found in the inner world of individual psychology and by their interpretation of experience as, in essence, symbolic. Both these stresses presume an organic relationship between the self and the cosmos of which only intuition and imagination can properly take account. These writers’ faith in the imagination and in themselves as practitioners of imagination led them conceive of the writer as a seer and enabled them to achieve supreme confidence in their own moral and metaphysical insights.

The author discuses “the democratic ethic” in order to

A. explain the relationship between external experience and inner imagination
B. support the notion that the self contains two conflicting and reconcilable
C. Illustrate the relationship between the self’s desire to be individual and its desire to merge with all other selves
D. Elaborate on the concept that the self constantly desires to realize its potential
E. Give an example of the idea that, in order to be happy, the self must reconcile its desires with external reality
Answer: C

Reading Comprehension GRE Practice Test 5

Reading Comprehension GRE Practice Test 5

Score: 0/10

Subscribe to our free newsletter.

Related Posts

Reading Comprehension Select In Passage GRE Practice Test 5

Reading Comprehension Select In Passage GRE Practice Test 4

Reading Comprehension Select In Passage GRE Practice Test 3

Reading Comprehension Select In Passage GRE Practice Test 2