EK 101 VR - Page 29, Question 31

[Gauss44]

EK 101 VR - Page 29, Passage VI, Question 31
This is the passage about Japan's Emperor post WWII.

My question is: How can answer C be correct if underlying anger from the Japanese people was also a concern about removing their emperor? Doesn't answer C incorrectly assume that there is only one possible reason for removing him?

Again, I cannot figure out why the test makers think it's okay to just ignore the last sentence, if that's what they are doing.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[drspacheman]

In the last paragraph, line 53 "he [the emperor] was seen as a crucial tool for the Americans to promote cooperation and bring about a democracy." This directly answers the question stem, but to address your concern:

The last sentence states "If he were deposed or tried as a war criminal, America would incur the undying anger of the Japanese people..."

So if America had decided to try to get rid of the emperor, then the Japanese would be angry. Since they did not try to remove the emperor, the Japanese are not actually angry. This last sentence was just more support for America using the emperor as a crucial tool, instead of facing the consequences of challenging him.

Also A, B, and D are not really relevant. Hope this helped

 

[Gauss44]

In the last paragraph, line 53 "he [the emperor] was seen as a crucial tool for the Americans to promote cooperation and bring about a democracy." This directly answers the question stem, but to address your concern:

The last sentence states "If he were deposed or tried as a war criminal, America would incur the undying anger of the Japanese people..."

So if America had decided to try to get rid of the emperor, then the Japanese would be angry. Since they did not try to remove the emperor, the Japanese are not actually angry. This last sentence was just more support for America using the emperor as a crucial tool, instead of facing the consequences of challenging him.

Also A, B, and D are not really relevant. Hope this helped

I see 2 reasons in the passage that there's still a Japanese emperor:

1. That the Americans didn't want to anger and force the Japanese, in the last sentence.

and

2. For the Americans to use the emperor "to their advantage."

So, why can't this be EITHER OR? One reason or the other.

If it were, then the correct answer, C, would be making a potentially inaccurate assumption about WHY the Americans preserved the emperor.

So, where did I go wrong? Must be the way it's presented.

 

[drspacheman]

It definitely could be either or. I would say that using the emperor to their advantage was the primary reason, because they mentioned it first and because they described that more in detail. The fact that the Americans didn't want to anger the Japanese could be seen as a secondary, or a consequence. But this is getting into too much detail, and either way both reasons are correct.

This doesn't really take away from the answer choices because the "consequence reason" was not presented as an answer choice. If it were then there would be a problem. And yes, if answer choice C contained the "consequence reason" alongside its "advantage reason" then it would be more accurate, however it is still correct.

The TPR verbal book has a funny saying, it goes something like "you need to pick the cream of the crap". The goal of all three sections on the mcat is to pick the best answer, the most correct answer. So yeah, answer choice C doesn't contain all the reasons Americans would want to keep the emperor in power, but it contains at least 1 correct reason, and it beats all the other answer choices, which makes it correct. Hope this helps!

 

[Gauss44]

It definitely could be either or. I would say that using the emperor to their advantage was the primary reason, because they mentioned it first and because they described that more in detail. The fact that the Americans didn't want to anger the Japanese could be seen as a secondary, or a consequence.

Question 31 says, "If the passage information is correct, what inference is justified by the fact that there is still a Japanese emperor, almost sixty years after the period described?"

Incorrect answer A (the one that fooled me) says, "The American debate regarding the role of the emperor had been decided."

Correct answer C says, "The Americans had decided that the emperor could be used to their advantage."

I took the last sentence in the passage to be an ALTERNATE REASON. I thought that it was possible (not necessarily probable) for the Americans to decide that they didn't want to force the Japanese or make them angry, but for whatever reason may have decided not to use the emperor to their advantage. If that's possible, then answer C is NOT NECESSARILY TRUE, or so I thought. So, I chose answer A since it seemed to lack that assumption.

Somehow that assumption is okay making answer C right, or answer C is right for another reason. I'm still trying to figure out why. Why C and not A?

 

[drspacheman]

A is incorrect simply because: what debate? There was no mention of any debate, or any real hard decision on America's part. The passage just stated that America viewed the emperor as a "crucial tool". From this we can infer that a "crucial tool" means that America could use the emperor to their advantage. Now I'm not saying that there is no way answer choice A is 100% incorrect, but answer choice C is definitely a better answer because you can definitely infer that conclusion. Does that make sense?

 

[Gauss44]

A is incorrect simply because: what debate? There was no mention of any debate, or any real hard decision on America's part. The passage just stated that America viewed the emperor as a "crucial tool". From this we can infer that a "crucial tool" means that America could use the emperor to their advantage. Now I'm not saying that there is no way answer choice A is 100% incorrect, but answer choice C is definitely a better answer because you can definitely infer that conclusion. Does that make sense?

LIne 48: "Whatever the reason, the debate over the emperor's role in the new Japan raged on among the Americans."

 

[drspacheman]

LIne 48: "Whatever the reason, the debate over the emperor's role in the new Japan raged on among the Americans."

Oops, my bad

Still C is a better answer. Your quote continues "The question was argued along a concrete line: no one actually liked the institution of the emperor, and everyone blamed him for the war, but he was seen as a crucial tool for the Americans..."

So yes, the debate over his role was still being discussed, but does this answer the question? The question is asking you why a Japanese emperor exists after 60 years. If the Americans had resolved the debate regarding his role, would that influence the existence of the Japanese emperor? No. You can't infer that the resolution of the Japanese emperor's role, as seen by the Americans, would determine whether or not an emperor would still be around.

Furthermore, although there was a debate, both sides agreed on some common ground. This is outlined in the quote I provided, but in a summary they agree that 1. No one liked the emperor 2. Everyone blamed him for the war 3. He was seen as a crucial tool. From this it should be pretty clear that the correct answer, and the correct inference to the question of why the emperor is still around after 60 years, is that Americans decided he could be used to their advantage.

And again, I'm not saying that choice A is completely wrong, you can definitely argue for it, but choice C clearly is a better answer, which is why its correct. Remember to always pick the best answer! Hope this helps