Loading question...
You are in free guest mode. Timed Practice Revision List Attempt History Progress Tracking Create a free account to unlock these tools
Back to Questions
Prev Next
Practice Listening: Multiple Choice, Single Answer ID: #38267 Short Holocaust
Instructions ›
Listen to the recording and answer the multiple-choice question by selecting the correct response. Only one response is correct.

Transcript:

A big scar on the face of morality is the Holocaust; six million people lost their lives but no one found the courage to speak on behalf of them. There is a big need now to bring values to a congruency. We must wake up to the need for understanding of basic human values and should be ready to take necessary action when they are violated in any way. However, life cannot be just lived in reactionary actions. We, the most intelligent species on earth, should create and uphokl :vahies. Then, instead of being judgmental, we would be proactive and objective in our behavior. Time now and again demands that instead of being a mute spectator, we should understand what the greater good is and act likewise to defend it.

How can we bring moral values to generate courage to fight "big scars" like Holocaust?

* Listen to the recording and select the correct answer

Result:

AI explanationShows the answer. Tap to open.
Option 3: "We should understand the greater good and objectively create a system to preempt violations."

Explanation: This option aligns perfectly with the text's main idea, which emphasizes the need for understanding basic human values and being proactive. It reflects the author's call to create a system that prevents violations, thus addressing the 'big scars' like the Holocaust.

Option 1: "We should have an advance action plan in hand to react to a situation."

Explanation: This option suggests having a reactive approach, which contradicts the text's emphasis on being proactive and creating values. The text advocates for understanding and preventing violations rather than merely reacting to them.

Option 2: "We should judge the seriousness of the violation of human values and stand by the oppressed."

Explanation: While this option mentions standing by the oppressed, it focuses on judgment rather than proactive measures. The text encourages understanding the greater good and creating systems to prevent violations, rather than just assessing their seriousness.

Option 4: "We should not be mute spectators and confront the perpetrators of heinous crimes."

Explanation: Although this option encourages action against perpetrators, it still implies a reactive stance. The text advocates for a deeper understanding and proactive measures to prevent violations, rather than just confronting them after they occur.

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

Sign in to read the full explanation

With a free account: Retry and compare every attempt.
Be the first! No community answers here yet. Submit yours and help others learn.
Saving...