Contemporary Writers

Loading question...

You are in free guest mode. Timed Practice Revision List Attempt History Progress Tracking Create a free account to unlock these tools

Prev Next

Practice Listening: Multiple Choice, Multiple Answers ID: #873 Medium Contemporary Writers

Instructions ›

Listen to the recording and answer the question by selecting all the correct responses. You will need to select more than one response.

Transcript:

The earliest writers on politics - and I'm thinking of Plato and Aristotle here - felt free to draw insights from all areas of human knowledge, unlike modern academic writers who tend to put things into smaller and smaller compartments, or focus more closely on one area of enquiry. For example, Plato would examine a whole political system and the philosophy that underlies it, whereas modern writers on politics might concentrate on one particular institution in that system - the House of Lords in England - or on voting patterns within a country. With this focus the bigger questions that the ancients dealt with - "What is the best form of government?" or "What is justice?" -tend to get left behind. Many writers on politics these days are university-based and so have to have specialized interests, and while they may make new and interesting discoveries in their special field, it is at the loss of a broader perspective - not to mention the loss of a general audience or readership. In the 19"' century, there were still writers who used the same freedom of enquiry as the ancients, and are all the more readable - and relevant - because of it.

What reasons does the speaker gives about contemporary writers being less readable than ancient writers?

* Click on the correct answers

They only write about institutions They tend to focus on only one aspect of political systems They ask largely irrelevant questions They follow the example of 19th century writers Being bound to universities forces them to specialize

Result:

AI explanationShows the answer. Tap to open.

Option 2: "They tend to focus on only one aspect of political systems"

Explanation: This option is correct as the text explicitly states that modern writers tend to focus more closely on one area of enquiry, which includes examining only one aspect of political systems. This narrow focus leads to the neglect of broader questions that ancient writers addressed.

Option 1: "They only write about institutions"

Explanation: This option is incorrect because the text does not state that contemporary writers only write about institutions. Instead, it mentions that they might concentrate on one particular institution, but this does not encompass the entirety of their writing.

Option 3: "They ask largely irrelevant questions"

Explanation: This option is incorrect because the text does not claim that contemporary writers ask irrelevant questions. It highlights that they focus on specific aspects, which may lead to leaving behind larger, more significant questions, but does not label their inquiries as irrelevant.

Option 4: "They follow the example of 19th century writers"

Explanation: This option is incorrect as the text suggests that 19th-century writers still maintained a broader perspective similar to ancient writers, rather than contemporary writers following their example. Thus, it does not accurately reflect the relationship between contemporary and 19th-century writers.

Option 5: "Being bound to universities forces them to specialize"

Explanation: This option is correct because the text states that many contemporary writers are university-based and have to have specialized interests. This specialization limits their broader perspective and contributes to their reduced readability compared to ancient writers.

The rest of this explanation is for members. Sign in free to read why the other options are wrong, key words and tips.

With a free account: Retry and compare every attempt.

Be the first! No community answers here yet. Submit yours and help others learn.

Saving...