#22 - Must Be True

[mN2mmvf]

Why not answer choice (C)? The passage states that most mainstream historians were nationalistic, writing in a way that "prompted the creation of new genealogies of nations, new myths about the inevitability of nations, their 'temperaments,' their destines."

Isn't myth-making and destiny-imbuing making the history of nations seem more glorious than they actually were?

I understand the rationale for (A), more or less, but I thought it was a weaker choice because I thought the passage didn't make clear if the promise of U.S. citizenship wasn't realized for legal/social reasons in the U.S., or because some African Americas identified culturally with the diaspora / an African homeland. If it was the latter, (A) seems like a claim with weak support.

[Adam Tyson]

You're right that at least some historians - the ones in the mainstream - were involved in that sort of myth-making, and it is probably okay to assume that "mainstream" means "most", although that might be a risky proposition. While the mainstream was focused on nationalist ideologies, I don't know that most historians were doing that myth-making stuff. Maybe that was a smaller group within the mainstream? I'm always wary of answers that talk about "most" without some clear language, maybe even some numbers, to support them.

There is, however, a bigger problem with answer C, mN2mmvf, and that is that we don't know anything about those myths being "more glorious than (the histories) actually were". How glorious were they? Maybe those historians genuinely believed that their nations' histories really were just as glorious as they claimed, and they were just striving to find new ways to express that glory? Perhaps the nationalist approach was entirely realistic, but just looking at history through a new lens? "Glory" is subjective, so can we be sure about anything that attempts to measure the quantity of gloriousness?

Answer A requires no subjective analysis, because our author has given us the textual support we need to pick it with absolute confidence. He told us in no uncertain terms that "the question of citizenship for African Americans had not been genuinely resolved. Because of this, emigrationist sentiment was a central issue in black political discourse... ." That is clear, causal language - the lack of resolution on the issue of citizenship caused emigrationist sentiment to be a central issue. Using what we know about causal language, especially the way it is used in the LSAT, we can be confident that if we had removed the cause (the issue was resolved) the effect would have gone away (emigrationist sentiment would not have been a central issue).

Use the text to prove your answers, and beware of claims that merely might be true (like "most" and "more glorious than they actually were"). Lean instead on answers that MUST be true, or that are, at the very least, strongly and directly supported by the language used in the passage.

Keep pounding!

[ROMI92]

Can someone explain exactly why answer chose E is correct?

[Rachael Wilkenfeld]

Answer choice (E) is not correct here. Answer choice (A) is the correct answer here. Did you have a question on a different question? Or is there something unclear for you about answer choice (A)? The more information you give us, the better we are able to help you.