Last visit was: 21 Nov 2024, 16:29 It is currently 21 Nov 2024, 16:29

Close

GRE Prep Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GRE score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel
SORT BY:
Date
Verbal Expert
Joined: 18 Apr 2015
Posts: 30003
Own Kudos [?]: 36341 [17]
Given Kudos: 25927
Send PM
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 26 Sep 2019
Posts: 4
Own Kudos [?]: 0 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 05 Oct 2019
Posts: 100
Own Kudos [?]: 207 [4]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Manager
Manager
Joined: 09 Jan 2020
Posts: 112
Own Kudos [?]: 274 [0]
Given Kudos: 97
Send PM
Re: A "scientistic" view of language was dominant among philosop [#permalink]
luffy wrote:
22) It can be inferred from the passage that in the late nineteenth century rhetoric was regarded as
=> The only point that can be inferred is that nature of "rhetoric" was questionable hence dubious (hence b). It doesn't shed light whether it was:
A the only necessary element of persuasive discourse
C an outmoded and tedious amplification of logic
D an open offense to the rational mind
E the most important of the humanistic studies



Can you help me further understand q22? Because I was not able to set up a proper timeline to answer this question. In the first paragraph, it mentioned rhetoric in a negative light "in the early part of this century.," then the second paragraph, it mentioned rhetoric in a positive light without mentioning the timing. So I thought first para was the first half of the century, and the second para was the second half of the century, therefore I selected C.

Kudos for anyone with a clear explanation
Verbal Expert
Joined: 18 Apr 2015
Posts: 30003
Own Kudos [?]: 36341 [2]
Given Kudos: 25927
Send PM
Re: A "scientistic" view of language was dominant among philosop [#permalink]
2
Expert Reply
Under the force of this view, it was perhaps inevitable that the art of rhetoric should pass from the status of being regarded as of questionable worth (because although it might be both a source of pleasure and a means to urge people to right action, it might also be a means to distort truth and a source of misguided action) to the status of being wholly condemned. If people are regarded only as machines guided by logic, as they were by these "scientistic" thinkers, rhetoric is likely to be held in low regard; for the most obvious truth about rhetoric is that it speaks to the whole person. It presents its arguments first to the person as a rational being, because persuasive discourse, if honestly conceived, always has a basis in reasoning. Logical argument is the plot, as it were, of any speech or essay that is respectfully intended to persuade people. Yet it is a characterizing feature of rhetoric that it goes beyond this and appeals to the parts of our nature that are involved in feeling, desiring, acting, and suffering.

B is the answer to the unfolding of the passage.

I hope now is clear.

Regards
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 27 Jul 2020
Posts: 1
Own Kudos [?]: 0 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: A "scientistic" view of language was dominant among philosop [#permalink]
Need a further explanation of Question 23 and 27. Can anyone explain why the other options are incorrect?
Manager
Manager
Joined: 09 Jan 2020
Posts: 112
Own Kudos [?]: 274 [0]
Given Kudos: 97
Send PM
Re: A "scientistic" view of language was dominant among philosop [#permalink]
Can someone please explain Q23?
I know there was an explanation but I'm still not clear
Verbal Expert
Joined: 18 Apr 2015
Posts: 30003
Own Kudos [?]: 36341 [4]
Given Kudos: 25927
Send PM
Re: A "scientistic" view of language was dominant among philosop [#permalink]
4
Expert Reply
Ok

Usually, I DO NOT explain the entire passage but only the answer choices of a question: which is right and which is wrong

So guys, hang on and follow me in this explanation.

But before to jump into the business, let me give you some information.

1) To me the best strategy is to read the passage first. oF COURSE, IT ALL DEPENDS ON YOUR LEVEL OF English Language - remember: these official passages are at an academic level, therefore, do not pretend they are the flyer to read of some grocery store. These are serious stuff

2) When I read the passage I do not take notes. I just read for something NOT just a sequence of facts facts and that's it. I do not read to something. I read FOR something. I at most re-read a sentence to stick out which is its role or it has something very important.

3) Now: this is a passage from the Big Book which has 7 questions. The actual RC are the same but a bit shortest and with at most 4 questions. But in terms of consistency, they are the same. Therefore, the passages from the BB are amazing for your exam
Making the count: you should take from 4 to seven minutes to read a long passage and 1 minute per question. Even though this is the average in terms of timing, I stay conservative: I try to stick to the minor timing i.e 4 minutes. Plus 1 minute for the questions. This passage has 7 questions. As such, I should take 11/12 minutes to finish. If it was an actual RC passage the timing should be 8 minutes.

I did it in 3.50 minutes with my phone timer. How this is possible..............ok I will show you with this tough Rc (not the super crazy though in terms of difficulty) but really super tough

Remember: I read the passage ONCE and for all and then I go straight to the questions, one by one. No hesitation

Please also, see my guide about time management https://gre.myprepclub.com/forum/gre-time- ... tml#p57079

I will update the rest in ONE hour from now :thumbsup:

Going to explain the passage in its essence, step by step

Quote:
A "scientistic" view of language was dominant among philosophers and linguists who affected to develop a scientific analysis of human thought and behavior in the early part of this century.


In brief, among the scholars, the view that went the most was a scientific approach when they did analyze the human behaviour and mind, our thoughts.

Quote:
Under the force of this view, it was perhaps inevitable that the art of rhetoric should pass from the status of being regarded as of questionable worth (because although it might be both a source of pleasure and a means to urge people to right action, it might also be a means to distort the truth and a source of misguided action) to the status of being wholly condemned.


Now, the key or central focus here is the rhetoric (do not bother you what is the rhetoric: if you do know is better, if not..whatever. Just think is something to keep in mind: the rhetoric, that's it).

Analyzing the rhetoric, the scientist we mention in the first sentence had a scientific approach. Therefore, the result, following this, is that the rhetoric itself went from a phenomenon that was questionable i.e. the implication was that the rhetoric had some doubt. An important point is what we do have inside the brackets: on one hand, the rhetoric calls people to action so it is NOT that bad but on the other hand, the rhetoric distorts the truth. hence, it could be a razor edge with pros and cons.

To recap: a scientific approach shifted the rhetoric from a point on the edge: maybe it is good, maybe it is bad to a level definitely bad: wholly condemned.

Quote:
If people are regarded only as machines guided by logic, as they were by these "scientistic" thinkers, rhetoric is likely to be held in low regard; for the most obvious truth about rhetoric is that it speaks to the whole person.


This is a sentence a bit difficult to grasp: IF we apply to the rhetoric ONLY the logic or the scientific approach we lose the grasp. i.e. we only see part of the story or we DO NOT understand fully the thoughts of a person. We would need to see more than that

Quote:
It presents its arguments first to the person as a rational being, because persuasive discourse, if honestly conceived, always has a basis in reasoning.


Here is crucial to understand the pronoun IT at the beginning of the sentence refers to. It is not so clear but is the scientific approach. The sentence says: a person is a rational entity. That's the meaning

Quote:
Logical argument is the plot, as it were, of any speech or essay that is respectfully intended to persuade people. Yet it is a characterizing feature of rhetoric that it goes beyond this and appeals to the parts of our nature that are involved in feeling, desiring, acting, and suffering.


In persuading people the logical argument is the basement. However, it also pertains to the rhetoric BUT as it turns out it goes beyond simple logic and encompasses also the nature of a person

Notice: this is an inference part. It is important but you should understand it but pass through fast.


Quote:
It recalls relevant instances of the emotional reactions of people to circumstances-real or fictional-that are similar to our own circumstances. Such is the purpose of both historical accounts and fables in persuasive discourse: they indicate literally or symbolically how people may react emotionally, with hope or fear, to particular circumstances. A speech attempting to persuade people can achieve little unless it takes into account the aspect of their being related to such hopes and fears.


The rhetoric is important because shows us the other nature side of a person: that related to his/her feeling and the situations he/she lives. A speech that tries to address something ONLY from the logical standing point will end up failing. Miserably


Quote:
Rhetoric, then, is addressed to human beings living at particular times and in particular places. From the point of view of rhetoric, we are not merely logical thinking machines, creatures abstracted from time and space.


This second paragraph goes down deeper of what is rhetoric. We are not logic machines but human beings. Pretty simple

Quote:
The study of rhetoric should therefore be considered the most humanistic of the humanities, since rhetoric is not directed only to our rational selves. It takes into account what the "scientistic" view leaves out.If it is a weakness to harbor feelings, then rhetoric may be thought of as dealing in weakness.


The study of rhetoric is essential because considered the most humanistic of the humanities. It comprehends NOT only the logic and scientific side but also the human side: specifically rhetoric takes into account our weakness

Quote:
But those who reject the idea of rhetoric because they believe it deals in lies and who at the same time hope to move people to action, must either be liars themselves or be very naive; pure logic has never been a motivating force unless it has been subordinated to human purposes, feelings, and desires, and thereby ceased to be pure logic.


This part is very important

Those who disregard the rhetoric just as something that deals with lies BUT at the same time want to mobilize people which is a typical feature that rhetoric has and conversely the scientific approach does not.....is a LIAR him or herself
Logic thinking is arid, a desert because it does not comprehend the emotions of a person, the feeling

The portion above is very important. In a nutshell, tell us our mind, our logic is pivotal but ALSO our heart.
Verbal Expert
Joined: 18 Apr 2015
Posts: 30003
Own Kudos [?]: 36341 [2]
Given Kudos: 25927
Send PM
Re: A "scientistic" view of language was dominant among philosop [#permalink]
2
Expert Reply
21) According to the passage, to reject rhetoric and still hope to persuade people is

We said from the passage that who thinks to ignore the rhetoric but want to move the people is a LIAR. B in 3 seconds to pick it up. It is very before our eyes

A an aim of most speakers and writers
B an indication either of dishonesty or of credulity
C a way of displaying distrust of the audience's motives
D a characteristic of most humanistic discourse
E a way of avoiding excessively abstract reasoning

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


22) It can be inferred from the passage that in the late nineteenth century rhetoric was regarded as

According to my explanations above, it is straight B: did you remember the razor edge, saw maybe was good maybe was bad but the definitely bad because the rhetoric could hide the truth ?' well, B is the answer

A the only necessary element of persuasive discourse
B a dubious art in at least two ways
C an outmoded and tedious amplification of logic
D an open offense to the rational mind
E the most important of the humanistic studies

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


23) The passage suggests that the disparagement of rhetoric by some people can be traced to their

A reaction against science
B lack of training in logic
C desire to persuade people as completely as possible
D misunderstanding of the use of the term "scientistic"
E view of human motivation

The disparagement means denigration BUT even if you do not know what that means is a negative thing for sure. Cannot be a positive thing. It is crystal clear.

Why some people throw out the rhetoric ?? Because they care about only logic without regard to the emotional side of a person. Immediately E.

Try to see thanks to my explanation above which is the correct answer. ASAP you read through the option, immediately you see the other bogus choices. IMMEDIATELY

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


24) The passage suggests that a speech that attempts to persuade people to act is likely to fail if it does NOT

A distort the truth a little to make it more acceptable to the audience
B appeal to the self-interest as well as the humanitarianism of the audience
C address listeners' emotions as well as their intellects
D concede the logic of other points of view
E show how an immediately desirable action is consistent with timeless principles

If the speech does not address in it also the emotions, then it will fail: both logic and emotions. C in two seconds

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


25) The passage suggests that to consider people as "thinking machines" is to consider them as

A beings separated from a historical context
B replaceable parts of a larger social machine
C more complex than other animals
D liars rather than honest people
E infallible in their reasoning

My explanation clearly stated that we are logical but also feeling. Moreover, we are related to our context. Where we live if you want to think about

A immediately as option

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


26) Which of the following persuasive devices is NOT used in the passage?

A A sample of an actual speech delivered by an orator
B The contrast of different points of view
C The repetition of key ideas and expressions
D An analogy that seeks to explain logical argument
E Evaluative or judgmental words


A is the ONLY example is NOT given in the passage. Did you see some sort of essay above ?? NO........


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




27) Which of the following best states the author's main point about logical argument?

A It is a sterile, abstract discipline, of little use in real life.
B It is an essential element of persuasive discourse, but only one such element.
C It is an important means of persuading people to act against their desires.
D It is the lowest order of discourse because it is the least imaginative.
E It is essential to persuasive discourse because it deals with universal truths.


This is one of the most important question on the GRE: the main idea. The big picture of what you read FOR something as I stated above.

Well: what we said ?? logic and heart; brain and emotions.....

Logic is just ONE thing............

B in one second



The bottom line of such a long explanation is pretty simple and ONE only:


1) read the passage FOR something NOT just facts facts in a sterile sequence
2) From top to the bottom.
3) read the questions and pick the correct one along the way. NO back and forth if not in rare cases
4) the correct answer choice should be before your eyes IMMEDIATELY.

Let me know guys. I would appreciate what you think

Regards
Carcass
Retired Moderator
Joined: 09 Jan 2021
Posts: 576
Own Kudos [?]: 846 [1]
Given Kudos: 194
GRE 1: Q167 V156
GPA: 4
WE:Analyst (Investment Banking)
Send PM
Re: A "scientistic" view of language was dominant among philosop [#permalink]
1
Carcass wrote:
21) According to the passage, to reject rhetoric and still hope to persuade people is

We said from the passage that who thinks to ignore the rhetoric but want to move the people is a LIAR. B in 3 seconds to pick it up. It is very before our eyes

A an aim of most speakers and writers
B an indication either of dishonesty or of credulity
C a way of displaying distrust of the audience's motives
D a characteristic of most humanistic discourse
E a way of avoiding excessively abstract reasoning

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


22) It can be inferred from the passage that in the late nineteenth century rhetoric was regarded as

According to my explanations above, it is straight B: did you remember the razor edge, saw maybe was good maybe was bad but the definitely bad because the rhetoric could hide the truth ?' well, B is the answer

A the only necessary element of persuasive discourse
B a dubious art in at least two ways
C an outmoded and tedious amplification of logic
D an open offense to the rational mind
E the most important of the humanistic studies

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


23) The passage suggests that the disparagement of rhetoric by some people can be traced to their

A reaction against science
B lack of training in logic
C desire to persuade people as completely as possible
D misunderstanding of the use of the term "scientistic"
E view of human motivation

The disparagement means denigration BUT even if you do not know what that means is a negative thing for sure. Cannot be a positive thing. It is crystal clear.

Why some people throw out the rhetoric ?? Because they care about only logic without regard to the emotional side of a person. Immediately E.

Try to see thanks to my explanation above which is the correct answer. ASAP you read through the option, immediately you see the other bogus choices. IMMEDIATELY

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


24) The passage suggests that a speech that attempts to persuade people to act is likely to fail if it does NOT

A distort the truth a little to make it more acceptable to the audience
B appeal to the self-interest as well as the humanitarianism of the audience
C address listeners' emotions as well as their intellects
D concede the logic of other points of view
E show how an immediately desirable action is consistent with timeless principles

If the speech does not address in it also the emotions, then it will fail: both logic and emotions. C in two seconds

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


25) The passage suggests that to consider people as "thinking machines" is to consider them as

A beings separated from a historical context
B replaceable parts of a larger social machine
C more complex than other animals
D liars rather than honest people
E infallible in their reasoning

My explanation clearly stated that we are logical but also feeling. Moreover, we are related to our context. Where we live if you want to think about

A immediately as option

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


26) Which of the following persuasive devices is NOT used in the passage?

A A sample of an actual speech delivered by an orator
B The contrast of different points of view
C The repetition of key ideas and expressions
D An analogy that seeks to explain logical argument
E Evaluative or judgmental words


A is the ONLY example is NOT given in the passage. Did you see some sort of essay above ?? NO........


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




27) Which of the following best states the author's main point about logical argument?

A It is a sterile, abstract discipline, of little use in real life.
B It is an essential element of persuasive discourse, but only one such element.
C It is an important means of persuading people to act against their desires.
D It is the lowest order of discourse because it is the least imaginative.
E It is essential to persuasive discourse because it deals with universal truths.


This is one of the most important question on the GRE: the main idea. The big picture of what you read FOR something as I stated above.

Well: what we said ?? logic and heart; brain and emotions.....

Logic is just ONE thing............

B in one second



The bottom line of such a long explanation is pretty simple and ONE only:


1) read the passage FOR something NOT just facts facts in a sterile sequence
2) From top to the bottom.
3) read the questions and pick the correct one along the way. NO back and forth if not in rare cases
4) the correct answer choice should be before your eyes IMMEDIATELY.

Let me know guys. I would appreciate what you think

Regards
Carcass


Great Explanation Carcass Kudos!!

My Question is, is it possible to do such a detailed interpretation of the passage given the time constraints that ETS has on the test. Does this develop by practicing difficult passage? Or we can try this on any article we read.

Thanks for helping

Kind regards
Verbal Expert
Joined: 18 Apr 2015
Posts: 30003
Own Kudos [?]: 36341 [1]
Given Kudos: 25927
Send PM
A "scientistic" view of language was dominant among philosop [#permalink]
1
Expert Reply
Well

Considering that I study English for twenty years more so for me is easier. Of course a student cannot wait so long to take the GRE.

However a high level or at least in tbe upper range is a must skill to perform well.

Certain gaps cannot be filled only with strategy and tricks.

And yes you can tackle the GRE in the time alloted.

Moreover, if your reading is in the high range those articles or lecture have the similar structure of the ETS passages. After all the GRE is an exam that is necessary for you to get in an academic environment.

Hope now is more clear and motivational to you my reply

Posted from my mobile device
Verbal Expert
Joined: 18 Apr 2015
Posts: 30003
Own Kudos [?]: 36341 [1]
Given Kudos: 25927
Send PM
Re: A "scientistic" view of language was dominant among philosop [#permalink]
1
Expert Reply
BTW

I did all the passage and the questions in around eight minutes.

The explanations of course in more than thirty minutes ☺️

Posted from my mobile device
Intern
Intern
Joined: 17 Jul 2021
Posts: 8
Own Kudos [?]: 4 [2]
Given Kudos: 2
Send PM
Re: A "scientistic" view of language was dominant among philosop [#permalink]
2
I found this particular essay a bit difficult even though, it was more because I wasn't applying active reading and was looking for a direct answer.
But after giving myself a break, and coming back to the question I could rationalize the answers provided and their position in the passage. I wasn't that happy with the reasons provided by the fellow commentators, So decide to provide my own explanation.

21) According to the passage, to reject rhetoric and still hope to persuade people is

Because this was the first question and I didn't read the passage properly, I was searching for the context in the first passage but the context is in the last sentence .

But those who reject the idea of rhetoric because they believe it deals in lies and who at the same time hope to move people to action, must either be liars themselves or be very naive; pure logic has never been a motivating force unless it has been subordinated to human purposes, feelings, and desires, and thereby ceased to be pure logic.[/i]

A an aim of most speakers and writers
B an indication either of dishonesty or of credulity ( Correct)
C a way of displaying distrust of the audience's motives
D a characteristic of most humanistic discourse
E a way of avoiding excessively abstract reasoning

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


22) It can be inferred from the passage that in the late nineteenth-century rhetoric was regarded as

Again for this too, I was searching for the time reference (19th century ) but was disappointed and frustrated as I wasn't able to find the exact position. But it actually taking in a general term; the first passage gives us the historical context and this is the actual position for the question. The passage does say that rhetoric has a negative image for scientists, so the answer should also be negative. Moreover, we have the passage providing additional context.

Under the force of this view, it was perhaps inevitable that the art of rhetoric should pass from the status of being regarded as of questionable worth (because although it might be both a source of pleasure and a means to urge people to right action, it might also be a means to distort truth and a source of misguided action)



A only necessary element of persuasive discourse
B a dubious art in at least two ways ( RIGHT) matches the excerpt context
C an outmoded and tedious amplification of logic
D an open offense to the rational mind
E the most important of the humanistic studies

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


23) The passage suggests that the disparagement of rhetoric by some people can be traced to their
The first passage is talking about this as whole.

Under the force of this view, it was perhaps inevitable that the art of rhetoric should pass from the status of being regarded as of questionable worth (because although it might be both a source of pleasure and a means to urge people to right action, it might also be a means to distort truth and a source of misguided action) to the status of being wholly condemned.

Yet it is a characterizing feature of rhetoric that it goes beyond this and appeals to the parts of our nature that are involved in feeling, desiring, acting, and suffering.


A reaction against science
B lack of training in logic
C desire to persuade people as completely as possible, If if see only one context of the passage, it is a suitable answer but E is more comprehensive considering the second point
D misunderstanding of the use of the term "scientistic"
E view of human motivation Correct ( It gives the overview of the First paragraph )


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


24) The passage suggests that a speech that attempts to persuade people to act is likely to fail if it does NOT

Yet it is a characterizing feature of rhetoric that it goes beyond this and appeals to the parts of our nature that are involved in feeling, desiring, acting, and suffering. It recalls relevant instances of the emotional reactions of people to circumstances-real or fictional-that are similar to our own circumstances. Such is the purpose of both historical accounts and fables in persuasive discourse: they indicate literally or symbolically how people may react emotionally, with hope or fear, to particular circumstances. A speech attempting to persuade people can achieve little unless it takes into account the aspect of their being related to such hopes and fears.



A distort the truth a little to make it more acceptable to the audience
B appeal to the self-interest as well as the humanitarianism of the audience, Quite Dangerous because of the matching word appeal but nothing is given about humanitarianism, likewise self interest itself is quite parochial to the emotions described
C address listeners' emotions as well as their intellects. CORRECT . ( Matches the contect)
D concede the logic of other points of view
E show how an immediately desirable action is consistent with timeless principles



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


25) The passage suggests that to consider people as "thinking machines" is to consider them as

Rhetoric, then, is addressed to human beings living at particular times and in particular places. From the point of view of rhetoric, we are not merely logical thinking machines, creatures abstracted from time and space.


A beings separated from a historical context ( Doesn't really match the sentence expect time given in sentence, but other are way bad than this so ) Correct
B replaceable parts of a larger social machine
C more complex than other animals
D liars rather than honest people
E infallible in their reasoning



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


26) Which of the following persuasive devices is NOT used in the passage?

A A sample of an actual speech delivered by an orator ( No Sample Speech is given ) Correct
B The contrast of different points of view
C The repetition of key ideas and expressions
D An analogy that seeks to explain a logical argument
E Evaluative or judgmental words



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




27) Which of the following best states the author's main point about logical argument?

Pre thinking : Overall the passage suggests that even though rhetoric has so supposed problem, it is a very essential part of persuasive reasoning.

It is a sterile, abstract discipline, of little use in real life. ( Too Negative)
B It is an essential element of persuasive discourse, but only one such element. ( Correct)
C It is an important means of persuading people to act against their desires. ( Against Derise? No)
D It is the lowest order of discourse because it is the least imaginative. ( Lowest? Too extreme)
E It is essential to persuasive discourse because it deals with universal truths. ( No, it can be actually be a distortion )

Most of time the best thing is to read actively so that u dont have to go back to the passage, but if u are not confident its alwasys advisable to refer to the passage again . :D
I am not an expert but this help me to better understand the passage and practise more .
So,I hope this help to anyone having a problem .
User avatar
SVP
SVP
Joined: 07 Jan 2021
Posts: 1722
Own Kudos [?]: 53 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: A "scientistic" view of language was dominant among philosop [#permalink]
Hello from the GRE Prep Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GRE Prep Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Prep Club for GRE Bot
Re: A "scientistic" view of language was dominant among philosop [#permalink]
Moderators:
GRE Forum Moderator
37 posts
GRE Instructor
234 posts
GRE Instructor
1065 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne