1. Which one of the following most completely and accurately expresses the main point of the passage?

Some Native American tribes have had difficulty
establishing their land claims because the United States
government did not recognize their status as tribes;
therefore during the 1970’s some Native Americans
(5) attempted to obtain such recognition through the
medium of U.S. courts. In presenting these suits,
Native Americans had to operate within a particular
sphere of U.S. government procedure, that of its legal
system, and their arguments were necessarily
(10) interpreted by the courts in terms the law could
understand: e.g., through application of precedent or
review of evidence. This process brought to light some
of the differing perceptions and definitions that can
exist between cultures whose systems of discourse are
(15) sometimes at variance.

In one instance, the entire legal dispute turned on
whether the suing community—a group of Mashpee
Wampanoag in the town of Mashpee, Massachusetts—
constituted a tribe. The area had long been occupied by
(20) the Mashpee, who continued to have control over land
use after the town’s incorporation. But in the 1960’s
after an influx of non-Mashpee people shifted the
balance of political power in the town, the new
residents were able to buy Mashpee-controlled land
(25) from the town and develop it for commercial or private
use. The Mashpee’s 1976 suit claimed that these lands
were taken in violation of a statute prohibiting transfers
of land from any tribe of Native Americans without
federal approval. The town argued that the Mashpee
(30) were not a tribe in the sense intended by the statute and
so were outside its protection. As a result, the Mashpee
were required to demonstrate their status as a tribe
according to a definition contained in an earlier ruling:
a body of Native Americans “governing themselves
(35) under one leadership and inhabiting a particular
territory.”

The town claimed that the Mashpee were not self
governing and that they had no defined territory: the
Mashpee could legally be self-governing, the town
(40) argued, only if they could show written documentation
of such a system, and could legally inhabit territory
only if they had precisely delineated its boundaries and
possessed a deed to it. The Mashpee marshaled oral
testimony against these claims, arguing that what the
(45) town perceived as a lack of evidence was simply
information that an oral culture such as the Mashpee’s
would not have recorded in writing. In this instance,
the disjunction between U.S. legal discourse and
Mashpee culture—exemplified in the court’s inability to
(50) “understand”the Mashpee’s oral testimony as
documentary evidence—rendered the suit unsuccessful.
Similar claims have recently met with greater success,
however, as U.S. courts have begun to acknowledge
that the failure to accommodate differences in
(55) discourse between cultures can sometimes stand in the
way of guaranteeing the fairness of legal decisions.

2. According to the passage, the Mashpee’s lawsuit was based on their objection to

Some Native American tribes have had difficulty
establishing their land claims because the United States
government did not recognize their status as tribes;
therefore during the 1970’s some Native Americans
(5) attempted to obtain such recognition through the
medium of U.S. courts. In presenting these suits,
Native Americans had to operate within a particular
sphere of U.S. government procedure, that of its legal
system, and their arguments were necessarily
(10) interpreted by the courts in terms the law could
understand: e.g., through application of precedent or
review of evidence. This process brought to light some
of the differing perceptions and definitions that can
exist between cultures whose systems of discourse are
(15) sometimes at variance.

In one instance, the entire legal dispute turned on
whether the suing community—a group of Mashpee
Wampanoag in the town of Mashpee, Massachusetts—
constituted a tribe. The area had long been occupied by
(20) the Mashpee, who continued to have control over land
use after the town’s incorporation. But in the 1960’s
after an influx of non-Mashpee people shifted the
balance of political power in the town, the new
residents were able to buy Mashpee-controlled land
(25) from the town and develop it for commercial or private
use. The Mashpee’s 1976 suit claimed that these lands
were taken in violation of a statute prohibiting transfers
of land from any tribe of Native Americans without
federal approval. The town argued that the Mashpee
(30) were not a tribe in the sense intended by the statute and
so were outside its protection. As a result, the Mashpee
were required to demonstrate their status as a tribe
according to a definition contained in an earlier ruling:
a body of Native Americans “governing themselves
(35) under one leadership and inhabiting a particular
territory.”

The town claimed that the Mashpee were not self
governing and that they had no defined territory: the
Mashpee could legally be self-governing, the town
(40) argued, only if they could show written documentation
of such a system, and could legally inhabit territory
only if they had precisely delineated its boundaries and
possessed a deed to it. The Mashpee marshaled oral
testimony against these claims, arguing that what the
(45) town perceived as a lack of evidence was simply
information that an oral culture such as the Mashpee’s
would not have recorded in writing. In this instance,
the disjunction between U.S. legal discourse and
Mashpee culture—exemplified in the court’s inability to
(50) “understand”the Mashpee’s oral testimony as
documentary evidence—rendered the suit unsuccessful.
Similar claims have recently met with greater success,
however, as U.S. courts have begun to acknowledge
that the failure to accommodate differences in
(55) discourse between cultures can sometimes stand in the
way of guaranteeing the fairness of legal decisions.

3. The author’s attitude toward the court’s decision in the Mashpee’s lawsuit is most clearly revealed by the author’s use of which one of the following phrases?

Some Native American tribes have had difficulty
establishing their land claims because the United States
government did not recognize their status as tribes;
therefore during the 1970’s some Native Americans
(5) attempted to obtain such recognition through the
medium of U.S. courts. In presenting these suits,
Native Americans had to operate within a particular
sphere of U.S. government procedure, that of its legal
system, and their arguments were necessarily
(10) interpreted by the courts in terms the law could
understand: e.g., through application of precedent or
review of evidence. This process brought to light some
of the differing perceptions and definitions that can
exist between cultures whose systems of discourse are
(15) sometimes at variance.

In one instance, the entire legal dispute turned on
whether the suing community—a group of Mashpee
Wampanoag in the town of Mashpee, Massachusetts—
constituted a tribe. The area had long been occupied by
(20) the Mashpee, who continued to have control over land
use after the town’s incorporation. But in the 1960’s
after an influx of non-Mashpee people shifted the
balance of political power in the town, the new
residents were able to buy Mashpee-controlled land
(25) from the town and develop it for commercial or private
use. The Mashpee’s 1976 suit claimed that these lands
were taken in violation of a statute prohibiting transfers
of land from any tribe of Native Americans without
federal approval. The town argued that the Mashpee
(30) were not a tribe in the sense intended by the statute and
so were outside its protection. As a result, the Mashpee
were required to demonstrate their status as a tribe
according to a definition contained in an earlier ruling:
a body of Native Americans “governing themselves
(35) under one leadership and inhabiting a particular
territory.”

The town claimed that the Mashpee were not self
governing and that they had no defined territory: the
Mashpee could legally be self-governing, the town
(40) argued, only if they could show written documentation
of such a system, and could legally inhabit territory
only if they had precisely delineated its boundaries and
possessed a deed to it. The Mashpee marshaled oral
testimony against these claims, arguing that what the
(45) town perceived as a lack of evidence was simply
information that an oral culture such as the Mashpee’s
would not have recorded in writing. In this instance,
the disjunction between U.S. legal discourse and
Mashpee culture—exemplified in the court’s inability to
(50) “understand”the Mashpee’s oral testimony as
documentary evidence—rendered the suit unsuccessful.
Similar claims have recently met with greater success,
however, as U.S. courts have begun to acknowledge
that the failure to accommodate differences in
(55) discourse between cultures can sometimes stand in the
way of guaranteeing the fairness of legal decisions.

4. Based on the passage, which one of the following can most reasonably be said to have occurred in the years since the Mashpee’s lawsuit?

Some Native American tribes have had difficulty
establishing their land claims because the United States
government did not recognize their status as tribes;
therefore during the 1970’s some Native Americans
(5) attempted to obtain such recognition through the
medium of U.S. courts. In presenting these suits,
Native Americans had to operate within a particular
sphere of U.S. government procedure, that of its legal
system, and their arguments were necessarily
(10) interpreted by the courts in terms the law could
understand: e.g., through application of precedent or
review of evidence. This process brought to light some
of the differing perceptions and definitions that can
exist between cultures whose systems of discourse are
(15) sometimes at variance.

In one instance, the entire legal dispute turned on
whether the suing community—a group of Mashpee
Wampanoag in the town of Mashpee, Massachusetts—
constituted a tribe. The area had long been occupied by
(20) the Mashpee, who continued to have control over land
use after the town’s incorporation. But in the 1960’s
after an influx of non-Mashpee people shifted the
balance of political power in the town, the new
residents were able to buy Mashpee-controlled land
(25) from the town and develop it for commercial or private
use. The Mashpee’s 1976 suit claimed that these lands
were taken in violation of a statute prohibiting transfers
of land from any tribe of Native Americans without
federal approval. The town argued that the Mashpee
(30) were not a tribe in the sense intended by the statute and
so were outside its protection. As a result, the Mashpee
were required to demonstrate their status as a tribe
according to a definition contained in an earlier ruling:
a body of Native Americans “governing themselves
(35) under one leadership and inhabiting a particular
territory.”

The town claimed that the Mashpee were not self
governing and that they had no defined territory: the
Mashpee could legally be self-governing, the town
(40) argued, only if they could show written documentation
of such a system, and could legally inhabit territory
only if they had precisely delineated its boundaries and
possessed a deed to it. The Mashpee marshaled oral
testimony against these claims, arguing that what the
(45) town perceived as a lack of evidence was simply
information that an oral culture such as the Mashpee’s
would not have recorded in writing. In this instance,
the disjunction between U.S. legal discourse and
Mashpee culture—exemplified in the court’s inability to
(50) “understand”the Mashpee’s oral testimony as
documentary evidence—rendered the suit unsuccessful.
Similar claims have recently met with greater success,
however, as U.S. courts have begun to acknowledge
that the failure to accommodate differences in
(55) discourse between cultures can sometimes stand in the
way of guaranteeing the fairness of legal decisions.

5. The passage is primarily concerned with

Some Native American tribes have had difficulty
establishing their land claims because the United States
government did not recognize their status as tribes;
therefore during the 1970’s some Native Americans
(5) attempted to obtain such recognition through the
medium of U.S. courts. In presenting these suits,
Native Americans had to operate within a particular
sphere of U.S. government procedure, that of its legal
system, and their arguments were necessarily
(10) interpreted by the courts in terms the law could
understand: e.g., through application of precedent or
review of evidence. This process brought to light some
of the differing perceptions and definitions that can
exist between cultures whose systems of discourse are
(15) sometimes at variance.

In one instance, the entire legal dispute turned on
whether the suing community—a group of Mashpee
Wampanoag in the town of Mashpee, Massachusetts—
constituted a tribe. The area had long been occupied by
(20) the Mashpee, who continued to have control over land
use after the town’s incorporation. But in the 1960’s
after an influx of non-Mashpee people shifted the
balance of political power in the town, the new
residents were able to buy Mashpee-controlled land
(25) from the town and develop it for commercial or private
use. The Mashpee’s 1976 suit claimed that these lands
were taken in violation of a statute prohibiting transfers
of land from any tribe of Native Americans without
federal approval. The town argued that the Mashpee
(30) were not a tribe in the sense intended by the statute and
so were outside its protection. As a result, the Mashpee
were required to demonstrate their status as a tribe
according to a definition contained in an earlier ruling:
a body of Native Americans “governing themselves
(35) under one leadership and inhabiting a particular
territory.”

The town claimed that the Mashpee were not self
governing and that they had no defined territory: the
Mashpee could legally be self-governing, the town
(40) argued, only if they could show written documentation
of such a system, and could legally inhabit territory
only if they had precisely delineated its boundaries and
possessed a deed to it. The Mashpee marshaled oral
testimony against these claims, arguing that what the
(45) town perceived as a lack of evidence was simply
information that an oral culture such as the Mashpee’s
would not have recorded in writing. In this instance,
the disjunction between U.S. legal discourse and
Mashpee culture—exemplified in the court’s inability to
(50) “understand”the Mashpee’s oral testimony as
documentary evidence—rendered the suit unsuccessful.
Similar claims have recently met with greater success,
however, as U.S. courts have begun to acknowledge
that the failure to accommodate differences in
(55) discourse between cultures can sometimes stand in the
way of guaranteeing the fairness of legal decisions.

6. Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main idea of the passage?

Long after the lava has cooled, the effects of a
major volcanic eruption may linger on. In the
atmosphere a veil of fine dust and sulfuric acid droplets
can spread around the globe and persist for years.
(5) Researchers have generally thought that this veil can
block enough sunlight to have a chilling influence on
Earth’s climate. Many blame the cataclysmic eruption
of the Indonesian volcano Tambora in 1815 for the
ensuing “year without a summer”of 1816—when parts
(10) of the northeastern United States and southeastern
Canada were hit by snowstorms in June and frosts in
August.

The volcano-climate connection seems plausible,
but, say scientists Clifford Mass and Davit Portman, it
(15) is not as strong as previously believed. Mass and
Portman analyzed global temperature data for the years
before and after nine volcanic eruptions, from Krakatau
in 1883 to El Chichón in 1982. In the process they tried
to filter out temperature changes caused by the cyclic
(20) weather phenomenon known as the El Niño-Southern
Oscillation, which warms the sea surface in the
equatorial Pacific and thereby warms the atmosphere.
Such warming can mask the cooling brought about by
an eruption, but it can also mimic volcanic cooling if
(25) the volcano happens to erupt just as an El Niño
induced warm period is beginning to fade.

Once El Niño effects had been subtracted from the
data, the actual effects of the eruptions came through
more clearly. Contrary to what earlier studies had
(30) suggested, Mass and Portman found that minor
eruptions have no discernible effect on temperature.
And major, dust-spitting explosions, such as Krakatau
or El Chichón, cause a smaller drop than expected in
the average temperature in the hemisphere (Northern or
(35) Southern) of the eruption—only half a degree
centigrade or less—a correspondingly smaller
drop in the opposite hemisphere.

Other researchers, however, have argued that even
a small temperature drop could result in a significant
(40) regional fluctuation in climate if its effects were
amplified by climatic feedback loops. For example, a
small temperature drop in the northeastern U.S. and
southeastern Canada in early spring might delay the
melting of snow, and the unmelted snow would
(45) continue to reflect sunlight away from the surface,
amplifying the cooling. The cool air over the region
could, in turn, affect the jet stream. The jet stream
tends to flow at the boundary between cool northern air
and warm southern air, drawing its power from the
(50) sharp temperature contrast and the consequent
difference in pressure. An unusual cooling in the region
could cause the stream to wander farther south than
normal, allowing more polar air to come in behind it
and deepen the region’s cold snap. Through such a
(55) series of feedbacks a small temperature drop could be
blown up into a year without a summer.

7. Not taking the effects of El Niño into account when figuring the effect of volcanic eruptions on Earth’s climate is most closely analogous to not taking into account the

Long after the lava has cooled, the effects of a
major volcanic eruption may linger on. In the
atmosphere a veil of fine dust and sulfuric acid droplets
can spread around the globe and persist for years.
(5) Researchers have generally thought that this veil can
block enough sunlight to have a chilling influence on
Earth’s climate. Many blame the cataclysmic eruption
of the Indonesian volcano Tambora in 1815 for the
ensuing “year without a summer”of 1816—when parts
(10) of the northeastern United States and southeastern
Canada were hit by snowstorms in June and frosts in
August.

The volcano-climate connection seems plausible,
but, say scientists Clifford Mass and Davit Portman, it
(15) is not as strong as previously believed. Mass and
Portman analyzed global temperature data for the years
before and after nine volcanic eruptions, from Krakatau
in 1883 to El Chichón in 1982. In the process they tried
to filter out temperature changes caused by the cyclic
(20) weather phenomenon known as the El Niño-Southern
Oscillation, which warms the sea surface in the
equatorial Pacific and thereby warms the atmosphere.
Such warming can mask the cooling brought about by
an eruption, but it can also mimic volcanic cooling if
(25) the volcano happens to erupt just as an El Niño
induced warm period is beginning to fade.

Once El Niño effects had been subtracted from the
data, the actual effects of the eruptions came through
more clearly. Contrary to what earlier studies had
(30) suggested, Mass and Portman found that minor
eruptions have no discernible effect on temperature.
And major, dust-spitting explosions, such as Krakatau
or El Chichón, cause a smaller drop than expected in
the average temperature in the hemisphere (Northern or
(35) Southern) of the eruption—only half a degree
centigrade or less—a correspondingly smaller
drop in the opposite hemisphere.

Other researchers, however, have argued that even
a small temperature drop could result in a significant
(40) regional fluctuation in climate if its effects were
amplified by climatic feedback loops. For example, a
small temperature drop in the northeastern U.S. and
southeastern Canada in early spring might delay the
melting of snow, and the unmelted snow would
(45) continue to reflect sunlight away from the surface,
amplifying the cooling. The cool air over the region
could, in turn, affect the jet stream. The jet stream
tends to flow at the boundary between cool northern air
and warm southern air, drawing its power from the
(50) sharp temperature contrast and the consequent
difference in pressure. An unusual cooling in the region
could cause the stream to wander farther south than
normal, allowing more polar air to come in behind it
and deepen the region’s cold snap. Through such a
(55) series of feedbacks a small temperature drop could be
blown up into a year without a summer.

8. The passage indicates that each of the following can be an effect of the El Niño phenomenon EXCEPT:

Long after the lava has cooled, the effects of a
major volcanic eruption may linger on. In the
atmosphere a veil of fine dust and sulfuric acid droplets
can spread around the globe and persist for years.
(5) Researchers have generally thought that this veil can
block enough sunlight to have a chilling influence on
Earth’s climate. Many blame the cataclysmic eruption
of the Indonesian volcano Tambora in 1815 for the
ensuing “year without a summer”of 1816—when parts
(10) of the northeastern United States and southeastern
Canada were hit by snowstorms in June and frosts in
August.

The volcano-climate connection seems plausible,
but, say scientists Clifford Mass and Davit Portman, it
(15) is not as strong as previously believed. Mass and
Portman analyzed global temperature data for the years
before and after nine volcanic eruptions, from Krakatau
in 1883 to El Chichón in 1982. In the process they tried
to filter out temperature changes caused by the cyclic
(20) weather phenomenon known as the El Niño-Southern
Oscillation, which warms the sea surface in the
equatorial Pacific and thereby warms the atmosphere.
Such warming can mask the cooling brought about by
an eruption, but it can also mimic volcanic cooling if
(25) the volcano happens to erupt just as an El Niño
induced warm period is beginning to fade.

Once El Niño effects had been subtracted from the
data, the actual effects of the eruptions came through
more clearly. Contrary to what earlier studies had
(30) suggested, Mass and Portman found that minor
eruptions have no discernible effect on temperature.
And major, dust-spitting explosions, such as Krakatau
or El Chichón, cause a smaller drop than expected in
the average temperature in the hemisphere (Northern or
(35) Southern) of the eruption—only half a degree
centigrade or less—a correspondingly smaller
drop in the opposite hemisphere.

Other researchers, however, have argued that even
a small temperature drop could result in a significant
(40) regional fluctuation in climate if its effects were
amplified by climatic feedback loops. For example, a
small temperature drop in the northeastern U.S. and
southeastern Canada in early spring might delay the
melting of snow, and the unmelted snow would
(45) continue to reflect sunlight away from the surface,
amplifying the cooling. The cool air over the region
could, in turn, affect the jet stream. The jet stream
tends to flow at the boundary between cool northern air
and warm southern air, drawing its power from the
(50) sharp temperature contrast and the consequent
difference in pressure. An unusual cooling in the region
could cause the stream to wander farther south than
normal, allowing more polar air to come in behind it
and deepen the region’s cold snap. Through such a
(55) series of feedbacks a small temperature drop could be
blown up into a year without a summer.

9. Which one of the following most accurately characterizes what the author of the passage means by a “minor” volcanic eruption (line 30)?

Long after the lava has cooled, the effects of a
major volcanic eruption may linger on. In the
atmosphere a veil of fine dust and sulfuric acid droplets
can spread around the globe and persist for years.
(5) Researchers have generally thought that this veil can
block enough sunlight to have a chilling influence on
Earth’s climate. Many blame the cataclysmic eruption
of the Indonesian volcano Tambora in 1815 for the
ensuing “year without a summer”of 1816—when parts
(10) of the northeastern United States and southeastern
Canada were hit by snowstorms in June and frosts in
August.

The volcano-climate connection seems plausible,
but, say scientists Clifford Mass and Davit Portman, it
(15) is not as strong as previously believed. Mass and
Portman analyzed global temperature data for the years
before and after nine volcanic eruptions, from Krakatau
in 1883 to El Chichón in 1982. In the process they tried
to filter out temperature changes caused by the cyclic
(20) weather phenomenon known as the El Niño-Southern
Oscillation, which warms the sea surface in the
equatorial Pacific and thereby warms the atmosphere.
Such warming can mask the cooling brought about by
an eruption, but it can also mimic volcanic cooling if
(25) the volcano happens to erupt just as an El Niño
induced warm period is beginning to fade.

Once El Niño effects had been subtracted from the
data, the actual effects of the eruptions came through
more clearly. Contrary to what earlier studies had
(30) suggested, Mass and Portman found that minor
eruptions have no discernible effect on temperature.
And major, dust-spitting explosions, such as Krakatau
or El Chichón, cause a smaller drop than expected in
the average temperature in the hemisphere (Northern or
(35) Southern) of the eruption—only half a degree
centigrade or less—a correspondingly smaller
drop in the opposite hemisphere.

Other researchers, however, have argued that even
a small temperature drop could result in a significant
(40) regional fluctuation in climate if its effects were
amplified by climatic feedback loops. For example, a
small temperature drop in the northeastern U.S. and
southeastern Canada in early spring might delay the
melting of snow, and the unmelted snow would
(45) continue to reflect sunlight away from the surface,
amplifying the cooling. The cool air over the region
could, in turn, affect the jet stream. The jet stream
tends to flow at the boundary between cool northern air
and warm southern air, drawing its power from the
(50) sharp temperature contrast and the consequent
difference in pressure. An unusual cooling in the region
could cause the stream to wander farther south than
normal, allowing more polar air to come in behind it
and deepen the region’s cold snap. Through such a
(55) series of feedbacks a small temperature drop could be
blown up into a year without a summer.

10. To which one of the following situations would the concept of a feedback loop, as it is employed in the passage, be most accurately applied?

Long after the lava has cooled, the effects of a
major volcanic eruption may linger on. In the
atmosphere a veil of fine dust and sulfuric acid droplets
can spread around the globe and persist for years.
(5) Researchers have generally thought that this veil can
block enough sunlight to have a chilling influence on
Earth’s climate. Many blame the cataclysmic eruption
of the Indonesian volcano Tambora in 1815 for the
ensuing “year without a summer”of 1816—when parts
(10) of the northeastern United States and southeastern
Canada were hit by snowstorms in June and frosts in
August.

The volcano-climate connection seems plausible,
but, say scientists Clifford Mass and Davit Portman, it
(15) is not as strong as previously believed. Mass and
Portman analyzed global temperature data for the years
before and after nine volcanic eruptions, from Krakatau
in 1883 to El Chichón in 1982. In the process they tried
to filter out temperature changes caused by the cyclic
(20) weather phenomenon known as the El Niño-Southern
Oscillation, which warms the sea surface in the
equatorial Pacific and thereby warms the atmosphere.
Such warming can mask the cooling brought about by
an eruption, but it can also mimic volcanic cooling if
(25) the volcano happens to erupt just as an El Niño
induced warm period is beginning to fade.

Once El Niño effects had been subtracted from the
data, the actual effects of the eruptions came through
more clearly. Contrary to what earlier studies had
(30) suggested, Mass and Portman found that minor
eruptions have no discernible effect on temperature.
And major, dust-spitting explosions, such as Krakatau
or El Chichón, cause a smaller drop than expected in
the average temperature in the hemisphere (Northern or
(35) Southern) of the eruption—only half a degree
centigrade or less—a correspondingly smaller
drop in the opposite hemisphere.

Other researchers, however, have argued that even
a small temperature drop could result in a significant
(40) regional fluctuation in climate if its effects were
amplified by climatic feedback loops. For example, a
small temperature drop in the northeastern U.S. and
southeastern Canada in early spring might delay the
melting of snow, and the unmelted snow would
(45) continue to reflect sunlight away from the surface,
amplifying the cooling. The cool air over the region
could, in turn, affect the jet stream. The jet stream
tends to flow at the boundary between cool northern air
and warm southern air, drawing its power from the
(50) sharp temperature contrast and the consequent
difference in pressure. An unusual cooling in the region
could cause the stream to wander farther south than
normal, allowing more polar air to come in behind it
and deepen the region’s cold snap. Through such a
(55) series of feedbacks a small temperature drop could be
blown up into a year without a summer.

11. The author of the passage would be most likely to agree with which one of the following hypotheses?

Long after the lava has cooled, the effects of a
major volcanic eruption may linger on. In the
atmosphere a veil of fine dust and sulfuric acid droplets
can spread around the globe and persist for years.
(5) Researchers have generally thought that this veil can
block enough sunlight to have a chilling influence on
Earth’s climate. Many blame the cataclysmic eruption
of the Indonesian volcano Tambora in 1815 for the
ensuing “year without a summer”of 1816—when parts
(10) of the northeastern United States and southeastern
Canada were hit by snowstorms in June and frosts in
August.

The volcano-climate connection seems plausible,
but, say scientists Clifford Mass and Davit Portman, it
(15) is not as strong as previously believed. Mass and
Portman analyzed global temperature data for the years
before and after nine volcanic eruptions, from Krakatau
in 1883 to El Chichón in 1982. In the process they tried
to filter out temperature changes caused by the cyclic
(20) weather phenomenon known as the El Niño-Southern
Oscillation, which warms the sea surface in the
equatorial Pacific and thereby warms the atmosphere.
Such warming can mask the cooling brought about by
an eruption, but it can also mimic volcanic cooling if
(25) the volcano happens to erupt just as an El Niño
induced warm period is beginning to fade.

Once El Niño effects had been subtracted from the
data, the actual effects of the eruptions came through
more clearly. Contrary to what earlier studies had
(30) suggested, Mass and Portman found that minor
eruptions have no discernible effect on temperature.
And major, dust-spitting explosions, such as Krakatau
or El Chichón, cause a smaller drop than expected in
the average temperature in the hemisphere (Northern or
(35) Southern) of the eruption—only half a degree
centigrade or less—a correspondingly smaller
drop in the opposite hemisphere.

Other researchers, however, have argued that even
a small temperature drop could result in a significant
(40) regional fluctuation in climate if its effects were
amplified by climatic feedback loops. For example, a
small temperature drop in the northeastern U.S. and
southeastern Canada in early spring might delay the
melting of snow, and the unmelted snow would
(45) continue to reflect sunlight away from the surface,
amplifying the cooling. The cool air over the region
could, in turn, affect the jet stream. The jet stream
tends to flow at the boundary between cool northern air
and warm southern air, drawing its power from the
(50) sharp temperature contrast and the consequent
difference in pressure. An unusual cooling in the region
could cause the stream to wander farther south than
normal, allowing more polar air to come in behind it
and deepen the region’s cold snap. Through such a
(55) series of feedbacks a small temperature drop could be
blown up into a year without a summer.

12. The information in the passage provides the LEAST support for which one of the following claims?

Long after the lava has cooled, the effects of a
major volcanic eruption may linger on. In the
atmosphere a veil of fine dust and sulfuric acid droplets
can spread around the globe and persist for years.
(5) Researchers have generally thought that this veil can
block enough sunlight to have a chilling influence on
Earth’s climate. Many blame the cataclysmic eruption
of the Indonesian volcano Tambora in 1815 for the
ensuing “year without a summer”of 1816—when parts
(10) of the northeastern United States and southeastern
Canada were hit by snowstorms in June and frosts in
August.

The volcano-climate connection seems plausible,
but, say scientists Clifford Mass and Davit Portman, it
(15) is not as strong as previously believed. Mass and
Portman analyzed global temperature data for the years
before and after nine volcanic eruptions, from Krakatau
in 1883 to El Chichón in 1982. In the process they tried
to filter out temperature changes caused by the cyclic
(20) weather phenomenon known as the El Niño-Southern
Oscillation, which warms the sea surface in the
equatorial Pacific and thereby warms the atmosphere.
Such warming can mask the cooling brought about by
an eruption, but it can also mimic volcanic cooling if
(25) the volcano happens to erupt just as an El Niño
induced warm period is beginning to fade.

Once El Niño effects had been subtracted from the
data, the actual effects of the eruptions came through
more clearly. Contrary to what earlier studies had
(30) suggested, Mass and Portman found that minor
eruptions have no discernible effect on temperature.
And major, dust-spitting explosions, such as Krakatau
or El Chichón, cause a smaller drop than expected in
the average temperature in the hemisphere (Northern or
(35) Southern) of the eruption—only half a degree
centigrade or less—a correspondingly smaller
drop in the opposite hemisphere.

Other researchers, however, have argued that even
a small temperature drop could result in a significant
(40) regional fluctuation in climate if its effects were
amplified by climatic feedback loops. For example, a
small temperature drop in the northeastern U.S. and
southeastern Canada in early spring might delay the
melting of snow, and the unmelted snow would
(45) continue to reflect sunlight away from the surface,
amplifying the cooling. The cool air over the region
could, in turn, affect the jet stream. The jet stream
tends to flow at the boundary between cool northern air
and warm southern air, drawing its power from the
(50) sharp temperature contrast and the consequent
difference in pressure. An unusual cooling in the region
could cause the stream to wander farther south than
normal, allowing more polar air to come in behind it
and deepen the region’s cold snap. Through such a
(55) series of feedbacks a small temperature drop could be
blown up into a year without a summer.

13. The primary purpose of the last paragraph of the passage is to

Long after the lava has cooled, the effects of a
major volcanic eruption may linger on. In the
atmosphere a veil of fine dust and sulfuric acid droplets
can spread around the globe and persist for years.
(5) Researchers have generally thought that this veil can
block enough sunlight to have a chilling influence on
Earth’s climate. Many blame the cataclysmic eruption
of the Indonesian volcano Tambora in 1815 for the
ensuing “year without a summer”of 1816—when parts
(10) of the northeastern United States and southeastern
Canada were hit by snowstorms in June and frosts in
August.

The volcano-climate connection seems plausible,
but, say scientists Clifford Mass and Davit Portman, it
(15) is not as strong as previously believed. Mass and
Portman analyzed global temperature data for the years
before and after nine volcanic eruptions, from Krakatau
in 1883 to El Chichón in 1982. In the process they tried
to filter out temperature changes caused by the cyclic
(20) weather phenomenon known as the El Niño-Southern
Oscillation, which warms the sea surface in the
equatorial Pacific and thereby warms the atmosphere.
Such warming can mask the cooling brought about by
an eruption, but it can also mimic volcanic cooling if
(25) the volcano happens to erupt just as an El Niño
induced warm period is beginning to fade.

Once El Niño effects had been subtracted from the
data, the actual effects of the eruptions came through
more clearly. Contrary to what earlier studies had
(30) suggested, Mass and Portman found that minor
eruptions have no discernible effect on temperature.
And major, dust-spitting explosions, such as Krakatau
or El Chichón, cause a smaller drop than expected in
the average temperature in the hemisphere (Northern or
(35) Southern) of the eruption—only half a degree
centigrade or less—a correspondingly smaller
drop in the opposite hemisphere.

Other researchers, however, have argued that even
a small temperature drop could result in a significant
(40) regional fluctuation in climate if its effects were
amplified by climatic feedback loops. For example, a
small temperature drop in the northeastern U.S. and
southeastern Canada in early spring might delay the
melting of snow, and the unmelted snow would
(45) continue to reflect sunlight away from the surface,
amplifying the cooling. The cool air over the region
could, in turn, affect the jet stream. The jet stream
tends to flow at the boundary between cool northern air
and warm southern air, drawing its power from the
(50) sharp temperature contrast and the consequent
difference in pressure. An unusual cooling in the region
could cause the stream to wander farther south than
normal, allowing more polar air to come in behind it
and deepen the region’s cold snap. Through such a
(55) series of feedbacks a small temperature drop could be
blown up into a year without a summer.

14. Which one of the following most completely and accurately expresses the main point of the passage?

Recently, a new school of economics called steady
state economics has seriously challenged neoclassical
economics, the reigning school in Western economic
decision making. According to the neoclassical model,
(5) an economy is a closed system involving only the
circular flow of exchange value between producers and
consumers. Therefore, no noneconomic constraints
impinge upon the economy and growth has no limits.
Indeed, some neoclassical economists argue that
(10) growth itself is crucial, because, they claim, the
solutions to problems often associated with growth
(income inequities, for example) can be found only in
the capital that further growth creates.

Steady-state economists believe the neoclassical
(15) model to be unrealistic and hold that the economy is
dependent on nature. Resources, they argue, enter the
economy as raw material and exit as consumed
products or waste; the greater the resources, the greater
the size of the economy. According to these
(20) economists, nature’s limited capacity to regenerate raw
material and absorb waste suggests that there is an
optimal size for the economy, and that growth beyond
this ideal point would increase the cost to the
environment at a faster rate than the benefit to
(25) producers and consumers, generating cycles that
impoverish rather than enrich. Steady-state economists
thus believe that the concept of an ever growing
economy is dangerous, and that the only alternative is
to maintain a state in which the economy remains in
(30) equilibrium with nature. Neoclassical economists, on
the other hand, consider nature to be just one element
of the economy rather than an outside constraint,
believing that natural resources, if depleted, can be
replaced with other elements—i.e., human-made
(35) resources—that will allow the economy to continue
with its process of unlimited growth.

Some steady-state economists, pointing to the
widening disparity between indices of actual growth
(which simply count the total monetary value of goods
(40) and services) and the index of environmentally
sustainable growth (which is based on personal
consumption, factoring in depletion of raw materials
and production costs), believe that Western economies
have already exceeded their optimal size. In response
(45) to the warnings from neoclassical economists that
checking economic growth only leads to economic
stagnation, they argue that there are alternatives to
growth that still accomplish what is required of any
economy: the satisfaction of human wants. One of
(50) the alternatives is conservation. Conservation—for
example, increasing the efficiency of resource use
through means such as recycling—differs from growth
in that it is qualitative, not quantitative, requiring
improvement in resource management rather than an
(55) increase in the amount of resources. One measure of
the success of a steady-state economy would be the
degree to which it could implement alternatives to
growth, such as conservation, without sacrificing the
ability to satisfy the wants of producers and consumers.

15. Based on the passage, neoclassical economists would likely hold that steady-state economists are wrong to believe each of the following EXCEPT:

Recently, a new school of economics called steady
state economics has seriously challenged neoclassical
economics, the reigning school in Western economic
decision making. According to the neoclassical model,
(5) an economy is a closed system involving only the
circular flow of exchange value between producers and
consumers. Therefore, no noneconomic constraints
impinge upon the economy and growth has no limits.
Indeed, some neoclassical economists argue that
(10) growth itself is crucial, because, they claim, the
solutions to problems often associated with growth
(income inequities, for example) can be found only in
the capital that further growth creates.

Steady-state economists believe the neoclassical
(15) model to be unrealistic and hold that the economy is
dependent on nature. Resources, they argue, enter the
economy as raw material and exit as consumed
products or waste; the greater the resources, the greater
the size of the economy. According to these
(20) economists, nature’s limited capacity to regenerate raw
material and absorb waste suggests that there is an
optimal size for the economy, and that growth beyond
this ideal point would increase the cost to the
environment at a faster rate than the benefit to
(25) producers and consumers, generating cycles that
impoverish rather than enrich. Steady-state economists
thus believe that the concept of an ever growing
economy is dangerous, and that the only alternative is
to maintain a state in which the economy remains in
(30) equilibrium with nature. Neoclassical economists, on
the other hand, consider nature to be just one element
of the economy rather than an outside constraint,
believing that natural resources, if depleted, can be
replaced with other elements—i.e., human-made
(35) resources—that will allow the economy to continue
with its process of unlimited growth.

Some steady-state economists, pointing to the
widening disparity between indices of actual growth
(which simply count the total monetary value of goods
(40) and services) and the index of environmentally
sustainable growth (which is based on personal
consumption, factoring in depletion of raw materials
and production costs), believe that Western economies
have already exceeded their optimal size. In response
(45) to the warnings from neoclassical economists that
checking economic growth only leads to economic
stagnation, they argue that there are alternatives to
growth that still accomplish what is required of any
economy: the satisfaction of human wants. One of
(50) the alternatives is conservation. Conservation—for
example, increasing the efficiency of resource use
through means such as recycling—differs from growth
in that it is qualitative, not quantitative, requiring
improvement in resource management rather than an
(55) increase in the amount of resources. One measure of
the success of a steady-state economy would be the
degree to which it could implement alternatives to
growth, such as conservation, without sacrificing the
ability to satisfy the wants of producers and consumers.

16. According to the passage, steady-state economists believe that unlimited economic growth is dangerous because it

Recently, a new school of economics called steady
state economics has seriously challenged neoclassical
economics, the reigning school in Western economic
decision making. According to the neoclassical model,
(5) an economy is a closed system involving only the
circular flow of exchange value between producers and
consumers. Therefore, no noneconomic constraints
impinge upon the economy and growth has no limits.
Indeed, some neoclassical economists argue that
(10) growth itself is crucial, because, they claim, the
solutions to problems often associated with growth
(income inequities, for example) can be found only in
the capital that further growth creates.

Steady-state economists believe the neoclassical
(15) model to be unrealistic and hold that the economy is
dependent on nature. Resources, they argue, enter the
economy as raw material and exit as consumed
products or waste; the greater the resources, the greater
the size of the economy. According to these
(20) economists, nature’s limited capacity to regenerate raw
material and absorb waste suggests that there is an
optimal size for the economy, and that growth beyond
this ideal point would increase the cost to the
environment at a faster rate than the benefit to
(25) producers and consumers, generating cycles that
impoverish rather than enrich. Steady-state economists
thus believe that the concept of an ever growing
economy is dangerous, and that the only alternative is
to maintain a state in which the economy remains in
(30) equilibrium with nature. Neoclassical economists, on
the other hand, consider nature to be just one element
of the economy rather than an outside constraint,
believing that natural resources, if depleted, can be
replaced with other elements—i.e., human-made
(35) resources—that will allow the economy to continue
with its process of unlimited growth.

Some steady-state economists, pointing to the
widening disparity between indices of actual growth
(which simply count the total monetary value of goods
(40) and services) and the index of environmentally
sustainable growth (which is based on personal
consumption, factoring in depletion of raw materials
and production costs), believe that Western economies
have already exceeded their optimal size. In response
(45) to the warnings from neoclassical economists that
checking economic growth only leads to economic
stagnation, they argue that there are alternatives to
growth that still accomplish what is required of any
economy: the satisfaction of human wants. One of
(50) the alternatives is conservation. Conservation—for
example, increasing the efficiency of resource use
through means such as recycling—differs from growth
in that it is qualitative, not quantitative, requiring
improvement in resource management rather than an
(55) increase in the amount of resources. One measure of
the success of a steady-state economy would be the
degree to which it could implement alternatives to
growth, such as conservation, without sacrificing the
ability to satisfy the wants of producers and consumers.

17. A steady-state economist would be LEAST likely to endorse which one of the following as a means of helping a steady-state economy reduce growth without compromising its ability to satisfy human wants?

Recently, a new school of economics called steady
state economics has seriously challenged neoclassical
economics, the reigning school in Western economic
decision making. According to the neoclassical model,
(5) an economy is a closed system involving only the
circular flow of exchange value between producers and
consumers. Therefore, no noneconomic constraints
impinge upon the economy and growth has no limits.
Indeed, some neoclassical economists argue that
(10) growth itself is crucial, because, they claim, the
solutions to problems often associated with growth
(income inequities, for example) can be found only in
the capital that further growth creates.

Steady-state economists believe the neoclassical
(15) model to be unrealistic and hold that the economy is
dependent on nature. Resources, they argue, enter the
economy as raw material and exit as consumed
products or waste; the greater the resources, the greater
the size of the economy. According to these
(20) economists, nature’s limited capacity to regenerate raw
material and absorb waste suggests that there is an
optimal size for the economy, and that growth beyond
this ideal point would increase the cost to the
environment at a faster rate than the benefit to
(25) producers and consumers, generating cycles that
impoverish rather than enrich. Steady-state economists
thus believe that the concept of an ever growing
economy is dangerous, and that the only alternative is
to maintain a state in which the economy remains in
(30) equilibrium with nature. Neoclassical economists, on
the other hand, consider nature to be just one element
of the economy rather than an outside constraint,
believing that natural resources, if depleted, can be
replaced with other elements—i.e., human-made
(35) resources—that will allow the economy to continue
with its process of unlimited growth.

Some steady-state economists, pointing to the
widening disparity between indices of actual growth
(which simply count the total monetary value of goods
(40) and services) and the index of environmentally
sustainable growth (which is based on personal
consumption, factoring in depletion of raw materials
and production costs), believe that Western economies
have already exceeded their optimal size. In response
(45) to the warnings from neoclassical economists that
checking economic growth only leads to economic
stagnation, they argue that there are alternatives to
growth that still accomplish what is required of any
economy: the satisfaction of human wants. One of
(50) the alternatives is conservation. Conservation—for
example, increasing the efficiency of resource use
through means such as recycling—differs from growth
in that it is qualitative, not quantitative, requiring
improvement in resource management rather than an
(55) increase in the amount of resources. One measure of
the success of a steady-state economy would be the
degree to which it could implement alternatives to
growth, such as conservation, without sacrificing the
ability to satisfy the wants of producers and consumers.

18. Based on the passage, a steady-state economist is most likely to claim that a successful economy is one that satisfies which one of the following principles?

Recently, a new school of economics called steady
state economics has seriously challenged neoclassical
economics, the reigning school in Western economic
decision making. According to the neoclassical model,
(5) an economy is a closed system involving only the
circular flow of exchange value between producers and
consumers. Therefore, no noneconomic constraints
impinge upon the economy and growth has no limits.
Indeed, some neoclassical economists argue that
(10) growth itself is crucial, because, they claim, the
solutions to problems often associated with growth
(income inequities, for example) can be found only in
the capital that further growth creates.

Steady-state economists believe the neoclassical
(15) model to be unrealistic and hold that the economy is
dependent on nature. Resources, they argue, enter the
economy as raw material and exit as consumed
products or waste; the greater the resources, the greater
the size of the economy. According to these
(20) economists, nature’s limited capacity to regenerate raw
material and absorb waste suggests that there is an
optimal size for the economy, and that growth beyond
this ideal point would increase the cost to the
environment at a faster rate than the benefit to
(25) producers and consumers, generating cycles that
impoverish rather than enrich. Steady-state economists
thus believe that the concept of an ever growing
economy is dangerous, and that the only alternative is
to maintain a state in which the economy remains in
(30) equilibrium with nature. Neoclassical economists, on
the other hand, consider nature to be just one element
of the economy rather than an outside constraint,
believing that natural resources, if depleted, can be
replaced with other elements—i.e., human-made
(35) resources—that will allow the economy to continue
with its process of unlimited growth.

Some steady-state economists, pointing to the
widening disparity between indices of actual growth
(which simply count the total monetary value of goods
(40) and services) and the index of environmentally
sustainable growth (which is based on personal
consumption, factoring in depletion of raw materials
and production costs), believe that Western economies
have already exceeded their optimal size. In response
(45) to the warnings from neoclassical economists that
checking economic growth only leads to economic
stagnation, they argue that there are alternatives to
growth that still accomplish what is required of any
economy: the satisfaction of human wants. One of
(50) the alternatives is conservation. Conservation—for
example, increasing the efficiency of resource use
through means such as recycling—differs from growth
in that it is qualitative, not quantitative, requiring
improvement in resource management rather than an
(55) increase in the amount of resources. One measure of
the success of a steady-state economy would be the
degree to which it could implement alternatives to
growth, such as conservation, without sacrificing the
ability to satisfy the wants of producers and consumers.

19. In the view of steady-state economists, which one of the following is a noneconomic constraint as referred to in line 7?

Recently, a new school of economics called steady
state economics has seriously challenged neoclassical
economics, the reigning school in Western economic
decision making. According to the neoclassical model,
(5) an economy is a closed system involving only the
circular flow of exchange value between producers and
consumers. Therefore, no noneconomic constraints
impinge upon the economy and growth has no limits.
Indeed, some neoclassical economists argue that
(10) growth itself is crucial, because, they claim, the
solutions to problems often associated with growth
(income inequities, for example) can be found only in
the capital that further growth creates.

Steady-state economists believe the neoclassical
(15) model to be unrealistic and hold that the economy is
dependent on nature. Resources, they argue, enter the
economy as raw material and exit as consumed
products or waste; the greater the resources, the greater
the size of the economy. According to these
(20) economists, nature’s limited capacity to regenerate raw
material and absorb waste suggests that there is an
optimal size for the economy, and that growth beyond
this ideal point would increase the cost to the
environment at a faster rate than the benefit to
(25) producers and consumers, generating cycles that
impoverish rather than enrich. Steady-state economists
thus believe that the concept of an ever growing
economy is dangerous, and that the only alternative is
to maintain a state in which the economy remains in
(30) equilibrium with nature. Neoclassical economists, on
the other hand, consider nature to be just one element
of the economy rather than an outside constraint,
believing that natural resources, if depleted, can be
replaced with other elements—i.e., human-made
(35) resources—that will allow the economy to continue
with its process of unlimited growth.

Some steady-state economists, pointing to the
widening disparity between indices of actual growth
(which simply count the total monetary value of goods
(40) and services) and the index of environmentally
sustainable growth (which is based on personal
consumption, factoring in depletion of raw materials
and production costs), believe that Western economies
have already exceeded their optimal size. In response
(45) to the warnings from neoclassical economists that
checking economic growth only leads to economic
stagnation, they argue that there are alternatives to
growth that still accomplish what is required of any
economy: the satisfaction of human wants. One of
(50) the alternatives is conservation. Conservation—for
example, increasing the efficiency of resource use
through means such as recycling—differs from growth
in that it is qualitative, not quantitative, requiring
improvement in resource management rather than an
(55) increase in the amount of resources. One measure of
the success of a steady-state economy would be the
degree to which it could implement alternatives to
growth, such as conservation, without sacrificing the
ability to satisfy the wants of producers and consumers.

20. Which one of the following most accurately describes what the last paragraph does in the passage?

Recently, a new school of economics called steady
state economics has seriously challenged neoclassical
economics, the reigning school in Western economic
decision making. According to the neoclassical model,
(5) an economy is a closed system involving only the
circular flow of exchange value between producers and
consumers. Therefore, no noneconomic constraints
impinge upon the economy and growth has no limits.
Indeed, some neoclassical economists argue that
(10) growth itself is crucial, because, they claim, the
solutions to problems often associated with growth
(income inequities, for example) can be found only in
the capital that further growth creates.

Steady-state economists believe the neoclassical
(15) model to be unrealistic and hold that the economy is
dependent on nature. Resources, they argue, enter the
economy as raw material and exit as consumed
products or waste; the greater the resources, the greater
the size of the economy. According to these
(20) economists, nature’s limited capacity to regenerate raw
material and absorb waste suggests that there is an
optimal size for the economy, and that growth beyond
this ideal point would increase the cost to the
environment at a faster rate than the benefit to
(25) producers and consumers, generating cycles that
impoverish rather than enrich. Steady-state economists
thus believe that the concept of an ever growing
economy is dangerous, and that the only alternative is
to maintain a state in which the economy remains in
(30) equilibrium with nature. Neoclassical economists, on
the other hand, consider nature to be just one element
of the economy rather than an outside constraint,
believing that natural resources, if depleted, can be
replaced with other elements—i.e., human-made
(35) resources—that will allow the economy to continue
with its process of unlimited growth.

Some steady-state economists, pointing to the
widening disparity between indices of actual growth
(which simply count the total monetary value of goods
(40) and services) and the index of environmentally
sustainable growth (which is based on personal
consumption, factoring in depletion of raw materials
and production costs), believe that Western economies
have already exceeded their optimal size. In response
(45) to the warnings from neoclassical economists that
checking economic growth only leads to economic
stagnation, they argue that there are alternatives to
growth that still accomplish what is required of any
economy: the satisfaction of human wants. One of
(50) the alternatives is conservation. Conservation—for
example, increasing the efficiency of resource use
through means such as recycling—differs from growth
in that it is qualitative, not quantitative, requiring
improvement in resource management rather than an
(55) increase in the amount of resources. One measure of
the success of a steady-state economy would be the
degree to which it could implement alternatives to
growth, such as conservation, without sacrificing the
ability to satisfy the wants of producers and consumers.

21. The passage suggests which one of the following about neoclassical economists?

Recently, a new school of economics called steady
state economics has seriously challenged neoclassical
economics, the reigning school in Western economic
decision making. According to the neoclassical model,
(5) an economy is a closed system involving only the
circular flow of exchange value between producers and
consumers. Therefore, no noneconomic constraints
impinge upon the economy and growth has no limits.
Indeed, some neoclassical economists argue that
(10) growth itself is crucial, because, they claim, the
solutions to problems often associated with growth
(income inequities, for example) can be found only in
the capital that further growth creates.

Steady-state economists believe the neoclassical
(15) model to be unrealistic and hold that the economy is
dependent on nature. Resources, they argue, enter the
economy as raw material and exit as consumed
products or waste; the greater the resources, the greater
the size of the economy. According to these
(20) economists, nature’s limited capacity to regenerate raw
material and absorb waste suggests that there is an
optimal size for the economy, and that growth beyond
this ideal point would increase the cost to the
environment at a faster rate than the benefit to
(25) producers and consumers, generating cycles that
impoverish rather than enrich. Steady-state economists
thus believe that the concept of an ever growing
economy is dangerous, and that the only alternative is
to maintain a state in which the economy remains in
(30) equilibrium with nature. Neoclassical economists, on
the other hand, consider nature to be just one element
of the economy rather than an outside constraint,
believing that natural resources, if depleted, can be
replaced with other elements—i.e., human-made
(35) resources—that will allow the economy to continue
with its process of unlimited growth.

Some steady-state economists, pointing to the
widening disparity between indices of actual growth
(which simply count the total monetary value of goods
(40) and services) and the index of environmentally
sustainable growth (which is based on personal
consumption, factoring in depletion of raw materials
and production costs), believe that Western economies
have already exceeded their optimal size. In response
(45) to the warnings from neoclassical economists that
checking economic growth only leads to economic
stagnation, they argue that there are alternatives to
growth that still accomplish what is required of any
economy: the satisfaction of human wants. One of
(50) the alternatives is conservation. Conservation—for
example, increasing the efficiency of resource use
through means such as recycling—differs from growth
in that it is qualitative, not quantitative, requiring
improvement in resource management rather than an
(55) increase in the amount of resources. One measure of
the success of a steady-state economy would be the
degree to which it could implement alternatives to
growth, such as conservation, without sacrificing the
ability to satisfy the wants of producers and consumers.

22. The passage suggests that the author would be most likely to agree with which one of the following statements?

As one of the most pervasive and influential
popular arts, the movies feed into and off of the rest of
the culture in various ways. In the United States, the
star system of the mid-1920s—in which actors were
(5) placed under exclusive contract to particular
Hollywood film studios—was a consequence of
studios’ discovery that the public was interested in
actor’s private lives, and that information about actors
could be used to promote their films. Public relations
(10) agents fed the information to gossip columnists,
whetting the public’s appetite for the films—which,
audiences usually discovered, had the additional virtue
of being created by talented writers, directors, and
producers devoted to the art of storytelling. The
(15) important feature of this relationship was not the
benefit to Hollywood, but rather to the press; in what
amounted to a form of cultural cross-fertilization, the
press saw that they could profit from studios’
promotion of new films.

(20) Today this arrangement has mushroomed into an
intricately interdependent mass-media entertainment
industry. The faith by which this industry sustains itself
is the belief that there is always something worth
promoting. A vast portion of the mass media—
(25) television and radio interviews, magazine articles, even
product advertisements—now does most of the work
for Hollywood studios attempting to promote their
movies. It does so not out of altruism but because it
makes for good business: If you produce a talk show
(30) or edit a newspaper, and other media are generating
public curiosity about a studio’s forthcoming film, it
would be unwise for you not to broadcast or publish
something about the film, too, because the audience for
your story is already guaranteed.

(35) The problem with this industry is that it has begun
to affect the creation of films as well as their
promotion. Choices of subject matter and actors are
made more and more frequently by studio executives
rather than by producers, writers, or directors. This
(40) problem is often referred to simply as an obsession
with turning a profit, but Hollywood movies have
almost always been produced to appeal to the largest
possible audience. The new danger is that,
increasingly, profit comes only from exciting an
(45) audience’s curiosity about a movie instead of satisfying
its desire to have an engaging experience watching the
film. When movies can pull people into theaters
instantly on the strength of media publicity rather than
relying on the more gradual process of word of mouth
(50) among satisfied moviegoers, then the intimate
relationship with the audience—on which the vitality
of all popular art depends—is lost. But studios are
making more money than ever by using this formula,
and for this reason it appears that films whose appeal is
(55) due not merely to their publicity value but to their
ability to affect audiences emotionally will become
increasingly rare in the U.S. film industry.

23. According to the author, the danger of mass-media promotion of films is that it

As one of the most pervasive and influential
popular arts, the movies feed into and off of the rest of
the culture in various ways. In the United States, the
star system of the mid-1920s—in which actors were
(5) placed under exclusive contract to particular
Hollywood film studios—was a consequence of
studios’ discovery that the public was interested in
actor’s private lives, and that information about actors
could be used to promote their films. Public relations
(10) agents fed the information to gossip columnists,
whetting the public’s appetite for the films—which,
audiences usually discovered, had the additional virtue
of being created by talented writers, directors, and
producers devoted to the art of storytelling. The
(15) important feature of this relationship was not the
benefit to Hollywood, but rather to the press; in what
amounted to a form of cultural cross-fertilization, the
press saw that they could profit from studios’
promotion of new films.

(20) Today this arrangement has mushroomed into an
intricately interdependent mass-media entertainment
industry. The faith by which this industry sustains itself
is the belief that there is always something worth
promoting. A vast portion of the mass media—
(25) television and radio interviews, magazine articles, even
product advertisements—now does most of the work
for Hollywood studios attempting to promote their
movies. It does so not out of altruism but because it
makes for good business: If you produce a talk show
(30) or edit a newspaper, and other media are generating
public curiosity about a studio’s forthcoming film, it
would be unwise for you not to broadcast or publish
something about the film, too, because the audience for
your story is already guaranteed.

(35) The problem with this industry is that it has begun
to affect the creation of films as well as their
promotion. Choices of subject matter and actors are
made more and more frequently by studio executives
rather than by producers, writers, or directors. This
(40) problem is often referred to simply as an obsession
with turning a profit, but Hollywood movies have
almost always been produced to appeal to the largest
possible audience. The new danger is that,
increasingly, profit comes only from exciting an
(45) audience’s curiosity about a movie instead of satisfying
its desire to have an engaging experience watching the
film. When movies can pull people into theaters
instantly on the strength of media publicity rather than
relying on the more gradual process of word of mouth
(50) among satisfied moviegoers, then the intimate
relationship with the audience—on which the vitality
of all popular art depends—is lost. But studios are
making more money than ever by using this formula,
and for this reason it appears that films whose appeal is
(55) due not merely to their publicity value but to their
ability to affect audiences emotionally will become
increasingly rare in the U.S. film industry.

24. The phrase “cultural cross-fertilization” (line 17) is used in the passage to refer to which one of the following?

As one of the most pervasive and influential
popular arts, the movies feed into and off of the rest of
the culture in various ways. In the United States, the
star system of the mid-1920s—in which actors were
(5) placed under exclusive contract to particular
Hollywood film studios—was a consequence of
studios’ discovery that the public was interested in
actor’s private lives, and that information about actors
could be used to promote their films. Public relations
(10) agents fed the information to gossip columnists,
whetting the public’s appetite for the films—which,
audiences usually discovered, had the additional virtue
of being created by talented writers, directors, and
producers devoted to the art of storytelling. The
(15) important feature of this relationship was not the
benefit to Hollywood, but rather to the press; in what
amounted to a form of cultural cross-fertilization, the
press saw that they could profit from studios’
promotion of new films.

(20) Today this arrangement has mushroomed into an
intricately interdependent mass-media entertainment
industry. The faith by which this industry sustains itself
is the belief that there is always something worth
promoting. A vast portion of the mass media—
(25) television and radio interviews, magazine articles, even
product advertisements—now does most of the work
for Hollywood studios attempting to promote their
movies. It does so not out of altruism but because it
makes for good business: If you produce a talk show
(30) or edit a newspaper, and other media are generating
public curiosity about a studio’s forthcoming film, it
would be unwise for you not to broadcast or publish
something about the film, too, because the audience for
your story is already guaranteed.

(35) The problem with this industry is that it has begun
to affect the creation of films as well as their
promotion. Choices of subject matter and actors are
made more and more frequently by studio executives
rather than by producers, writers, or directors. This
(40) problem is often referred to simply as an obsession
with turning a profit, but Hollywood movies have
almost always been produced to appeal to the largest
possible audience. The new danger is that,
increasingly, profit comes only from exciting an
(45) audience’s curiosity about a movie instead of satisfying
its desire to have an engaging experience watching the
film. When movies can pull people into theaters
instantly on the strength of media publicity rather than
relying on the more gradual process of word of mouth
(50) among satisfied moviegoers, then the intimate
relationship with the audience—on which the vitality
of all popular art depends—is lost. But studios are
making more money than ever by using this formula,
and for this reason it appears that films whose appeal is
(55) due not merely to their publicity value but to their
ability to affect audiences emotionally will become
increasingly rare in the U.S. film industry.

25. Which one of the following most accurately describes the organization of the passage?

As one of the most pervasive and influential
popular arts, the movies feed into and off of the rest of
the culture in various ways. In the United States, the
star system of the mid-1920s—in which actors were
(5) placed under exclusive contract to particular
Hollywood film studios—was a consequence of
studios’ discovery that the public was interested in
actor’s private lives, and that information about actors
could be used to promote their films. Public relations
(10) agents fed the information to gossip columnists,
whetting the public’s appetite for the films—which,
audiences usually discovered, had the additional virtue
of being created by talented writers, directors, and
producers devoted to the art of storytelling. The
(15) important feature of this relationship was not the
benefit to Hollywood, but rather to the press; in what
amounted to a form of cultural cross-fertilization, the
press saw that they could profit from studios’
promotion of new films.

(20) Today this arrangement has mushroomed into an
intricately interdependent mass-media entertainment
industry. The faith by which this industry sustains itself
is the belief that there is always something worth
promoting. A vast portion of the mass media—
(25) television and radio interviews, magazine articles, even
product advertisements—now does most of the work
for Hollywood studios attempting to promote their
movies. It does so not out of altruism but because it
makes for good business: If you produce a talk show
(30) or edit a newspaper, and other media are generating
public curiosity about a studio’s forthcoming film, it
would be unwise for you not to broadcast or publish
something about the film, too, because the audience for
your story is already guaranteed.

(35) The problem with this industry is that it has begun
to affect the creation of films as well as their
promotion. Choices of subject matter and actors are
made more and more frequently by studio executives
rather than by producers, writers, or directors. This
(40) problem is often referred to simply as an obsession
with turning a profit, but Hollywood movies have
almost always been produced to appeal to the largest
possible audience. The new danger is that,
increasingly, profit comes only from exciting an
(45) audience’s curiosity about a movie instead of satisfying
its desire to have an engaging experience watching the
film. When movies can pull people into theaters
instantly on the strength of media publicity rather than
relying on the more gradual process of word of mouth
(50) among satisfied moviegoers, then the intimate
relationship with the audience—on which the vitality
of all popular art depends—is lost. But studios are
making more money than ever by using this formula,
and for this reason it appears that films whose appeal is
(55) due not merely to their publicity value but to their
ability to affect audiences emotionally will become
increasingly rare in the U.S. film industry.

26. The author’s position in lines 35-47 would be most weakened if which one of the following were true?

As one of the most pervasive and influential
popular arts, the movies feed into and off of the rest of
the culture in various ways. In the United States, the
star system of the mid-1920s—in which actors were
(5) placed under exclusive contract to particular
Hollywood film studios—was a consequence of
studios’ discovery that the public was interested in
actor’s private lives, and that information about actors
could be used to promote their films. Public relations
(10) agents fed the information to gossip columnists,
whetting the public’s appetite for the films—which,
audiences usually discovered, had the additional virtue
of being created by talented writers, directors, and
producers devoted to the art of storytelling. The
(15) important feature of this relationship was not the
benefit to Hollywood, but rather to the press; in what
amounted to a form of cultural cross-fertilization, the
press saw that they could profit from studios’
promotion of new films.

(20) Today this arrangement has mushroomed into an
intricately interdependent mass-media entertainment
industry. The faith by which this industry sustains itself
is the belief that there is always something worth
promoting. A vast portion of the mass media—
(25) television and radio interviews, magazine articles, even
product advertisements—now does most of the work
for Hollywood studios attempting to promote their
movies. It does so not out of altruism but because it
makes for good business: If you produce a talk show
(30) or edit a newspaper, and other media are generating
public curiosity about a studio’s forthcoming film, it
would be unwise for you not to broadcast or publish
something about the film, too, because the audience for
your story is already guaranteed.

(35) The problem with this industry is that it has begun
to affect the creation of films as well as their
promotion. Choices of subject matter and actors are
made more and more frequently by studio executives
rather than by producers, writers, or directors. This
(40) problem is often referred to simply as an obsession
with turning a profit, but Hollywood movies have
almost always been produced to appeal to the largest
possible audience. The new danger is that,
increasingly, profit comes only from exciting an
(45) audience’s curiosity about a movie instead of satisfying
its desire to have an engaging experience watching the
film. When movies can pull people into theaters
instantly on the strength of media publicity rather than
relying on the more gradual process of word of mouth
(50) among satisfied moviegoers, then the intimate
relationship with the audience—on which the vitality
of all popular art depends—is lost. But studios are
making more money than ever by using this formula,
and for this reason it appears that films whose appeal is
(55) due not merely to their publicity value but to their
ability to affect audiences emotionally will become
increasingly rare in the U.S. film industry.