A couple of Passage based reading questions

<p>Intro: These passages are adapted from observations made by two 20th century historians on how nations--and people--make use of their sense of their own history.</p>

<p>Passage 1:</p>

<p>Modern people, especially when harried and perplexed by the sweep of events, peer earnestly into history for some illumination of their predicament and prospects, even though they may only read magazine articles or listen to the radio or television. And when great events rouse people to their most responsible temper, and fierce national ordeals awaken them to a new sense of their capacities, they turn readily to the writing of history, for they wish to instruct, and to its reading, for they want to learn. It was no accident that the First World War fostered such an interest in history that for a time the number of books in English devoted to history exceeded the titles in fiction. </p>

<p>Passage 2:</p>

<p>It used to be said that history should be written without prejudice, that the historian must not step aside to draw a moral. The first cannot be done; the second should not. Historians should always draw morals. If the accurate, judicious and highly trained scholars fail to do so, the unscrupulous and unqualified will do it for them, and the deluded public will listen gaping to false but more emphatic prophets. Historians who neglect the education of the public are responsible for the villainous stuff to which the public will go instead. A nation does not create the historians it deserves; the historians are far more likely to create the nation. </p>

<p>Both these passages are shortened and formatted to answer the following question:
The author of Passage 2 would most likely consider the "number" (line 35, Passage 1) an example of the
A) appetite for history that makes the public vulnerable to irresponsible historians.
C) interest in history that leads readers to overestimate their own expertise.</p>

<p>The answer is A. I see why its A but i don't see why it's not C. Help?</p>

<ol>
<li>
The author of Passage 1 and the author of Passage 2 differ most strongly on which topic?
A) the appeal of history
B) the reliability of historians</li>
</ol>

<p>Why is it A and not B?</p>

<p>For those who have the QAS, the second question is directed to towards you because you need the entirety of both passages to answer number 25.</p>

<p>
[quote]
The author of Passage 2 would most likely consider the "number" (line 35, Passage 1) an example of the
A) appetite for history that makes the public vulnerable to irresponsible historians.
C) interest in history that leads readers to overestimate their own expertise.

[/quote]

[quote]
C) interest in history that leads readers to overestimate their own expertise.

[/quote]

The readers don't have expertise; the writers do. That is why the writers of history are responsible for the education of the public; if they fail to educate the public skillfully, the unqualified readers will interpret history for themselves in an unideal way (not purposefully, but naturally). They do this not because they think they are skilled enough to do so (not because they "overestimate their own expertise"), but because they naturally do so in reading history. </p>

<p>"If the accurate, judicious and highly trained scholars fail to do so, the unscrupulous and unqualified will do it for them, and the deluded public will listen gaping to false but more emphatic prophets."</p>

<p>The public doesn't know better. The readers are the victims here. The passage has nothing to do with the skill with which readers interpret history; it is all about what causes them to do so, and why historians are responsible.</p>