睡熊的难题3: LSAT-15-4-11

睡熊

11.    Conservative: Socialists begin their arguments with an analysis of history, from which they claim to derive certain trends leading inevitably to a socialist future. But in the day-to-day progress of history there are never such discernible trends. Only in retrospect does inevitability appear, for history occurs through accident, contingency, and individual struggle.
Socialist: If we thought the outcome of history were inevitable, we would not work so hard to transform the institutions of capitalist society. But to transform them we must first understand them, and we can only understand them by an analysis of their history. This is why historical analysis is important in socialist argument.

    In the dispute the issue between the socialist and the conservatives can most accurately be described as whether
(A) a socialist society is the inevitable consequence of historical trends that can be identified by an analysis of history
(B) the institutions of capitalist society stand in need of transformation
(C) socialists' arguments for the inevitability of socialism are justified
(D) it is possible for people by their own efforts to affect the course of history
(E) socialists analyze history in order to support the view that socialism is inevitable

这道题答案是（E），可是我怎么做都是（A）。我认为（E）只是在重复叙述一种目的，而（A）才是两者的分歧之处，麻烦大家给指教指教，谢谢！

深海的小美人鱼

这里争执的是socialists analyze history的意义,而并非 a socialist society is the inevitable consequence of historical trends.
这道题是有点狡猾.

睡熊

理解上还是有点问题，我理解争论的焦点应该是：historical trend can be identified or not，再帮帮我吧，谢谢！

深海的小美人鱼

后者在反驳前者,你看看前者的意图是什么呢? 是在谴责 socialists begin their arguments with an analysis of history.

睡熊

终于明白了，谢谢小美人鱼！