Identifying Main Idea
Help Questions
GED › Identifying Main Idea
The following question refers to the information contained in this passage.
Communism is an economic system where the government controls property and the means of production. Its primary intention is to promote economic equality and normalize the standard of living. In theory, a perfect communist system would result in no man having more or less than his neighbor and would involve everyone doing an equal amount of work for an equal incentive—the good of the collective whole. Yet, every time pure communism has been attempted on a large scale in human history it has resulted in widespread famine and poverty. Why might this be? Well, the simplest answer is human nature. The positive aspects—our competitive nature, our desire to better ourselves and our families lives—and the negative—our inability to work hard without incentive, our desire to manipulate one another—all combine to favor an economic system that is based on competition and individually-motivated reward.
The author of this passage is primarily arguing .
that Communism fails because it goes against basic human nature
for a nation-building experiment in Communism on a smaller scale
against the complete rejection of Communism
that Communism fails because it always results in widespread famine and poverty
against the idea that Communism can be enforced on a smaller scale
Explanation
The author of this passage is primarily arguing that Communism can never work because it goes against human nature. This can be clearly seen after the author asks “why might this be?” and goes on to list how Communism goes against our positive and negative aspects. That Communism fails because it always results in widespread famine and poverty is closer to how it fails than why it fails.
The following question refers to the information contained in this passage.
When considered from a historical standpoint, most academics believe that St. Paul was far more important to the development of the western world than Jesus Christ. Christianity of course emerged from the teachings of Jesus Christ, but it spread due to the dedicated work of St. Paul.
St. Paul was, in his own time, a famously devout Jew. He lived a pious life dedicated to God. One day, according to Paul, Christ spoke to him and showed him the way. From that moment on, Paul would travel back and forth across the Western World spreading the word of Christ and trying to convert anybody who would listen. Paul’s messages reached Rome, Greece, North Africa, the Middle East, Eastern Europe and even further afield. Without Paul’s influence, it is likely that Christ’s religion would have remained a niche branch of Judaism, rather than being established as the dominant western religion in its own right. Paul would continue his proselytizing right up until he died—condemned to death by the Romans for preaching a heathen religion.
The main idea of this passage is that
the rise of Christianity in the west owed more to the work of St. Paul than to Christ.
Christ is an overrated figure as far as historical importance goes.
St. Paul took many risks in order to spread the word of Christianity.
the rise and fall of the Roman Empire can be traced through the emergence of Christianity as the dominant religion in the Empire.
most people were reluctant to adopt Christianity until they were convinced otherwise by St. Paul.
Explanation
The main idea of this passage is to emphasize the importance of St. Paul in spreading Christianity around the Western World. According to the author, "St. Paul was far more important to the development of the western world than Jesus Christ." Although the author talks about how Paul died for his faith, the main idea is not that Paul took many risks in order to spread Christianity.
The isolation of every human soul and the necessity of self-dependence must give each individual the right to choose his own surroundings. The strongest reason for giving woman all the opportunities for higher education, for the full development of her faculties, her forces of mind and body; for giving her the most enlarged freedom of thought and action; a complete emancipation from all forms of bondage, of custom, dependence, superstition; from all the crippling influences of fear--is the solitude and personal responsibility of her own individual life. The strongest reason why we ask for woman a voice in the government under which she lives; in the religion she is asked to believe; equality in social life, where she is the chief factor; a place in the trades and professions, where she may earn her bread, is because of her birthright to self sovereignty; because, as an individual, she must rely on herself.
To throw obstacles in the way of a complete education is like putting out the eyes; to deny the rights of property is like cutting off the hands. To refuse political equality is to rob the ostracized of all self-respect, of credit in the market place, of recompense in the world of work, of a voice in choosing those who make and administer the law, a choice in the jury before whom they are tried, and in the judge who decides their punishment. Shakespeare's play of Titus and Andronicus contains a terrible satire on woman's position in the nineteenth century--"Rude men seized the king's daughter, cut out her tongue, cut off her hands, and then bade her go call for water and wash her hands." What a picture of woman's position! Robbed of her natural rights, handicapped by law and custom at every turn, yet compelled to fight her own battles, and in the emergencies of life to fall back on herself for protection.
(1892)
What is the main idea of this passage?
Denying women the right to same education available to men is denying them the opportunity to become truly self-sufficient
Women are not being given the right to an equal education because men don't believe they are intelligent enough to benefit from it
If women are given the right to an equal education, they will quickly become the dominant gender on the planet
Men who do not support the idea of equal educational opportunities for women risk being attacked by women who are angry about their treatement
Explanation
Stanton's thesis states that the need for education stems from "the isolation of the human soul and the necessity of self-dependence." In the second paragraph, she states that denying women educational opportunities is "like putting out the eyes", or not allowing women access to the tools they need to become truly self-sufficient.
Passage adapted from The Solitude of Self by Elizabeth Cady Stanton (1892)
"Newton's Mistakes" by Daniel Morrison (2014)
Isaac Newton has often been thought of as the greatest thinker in human history. His insight into the role that gravity plays in existence and physics completely changed our collective understanding of the universe and our place in it. He was understood in his own time as a genius. One famous quote by Alexander Pope (himself quite an intelligent man) demonstrates the deep affection felt for Newton: “Nature, and nature’s mysteries, lay bathed in night, God said 'Let there be Newton,’ and all was light.”
Yet, when the famous economist John Kenneth Galbraith purchased Newton’s journals and diaries at auction, he found to his astonishment, and partial dismay, that more than half of Newton’s work was dedicated to the practice of alchemy—the pursuit of turning ordinary materials into precious metals. Our current understanding of science tells us that this is impossible and that Newton was wasting a significant proportion of his time.
Another famous story about Newton tells of his attempts to figure out the effect of direct exposure to sunlight on the human eye. To carry out this experiment he decided to stare at the sun for as long as humanly possible to see what would happen. The effect, as you might have guessed, was that he very nearly went permanently blind and was indeed completely unable to see for two days.
One might determine from these stories that Newton was not the genius we consider him to be—that he was, in fact, a fool; however, it should tell us something about the nature of genius. It is not merely deep intelligence, but the willingness to try new things and the rejection of the fear of failure. Newton was not a genius in spite of his mistakes, but because of them.
The main argument of this essay is .
That Newton was a genius because of his willingness to make mistakes, not in spite of this
That genius is born, not made
That Newton’s contributions to science make him the greatest mind in human history
That in spite of his many breathtaking achievements, Newton should be best remembered for his foolishness
That the pursuit of alchemy ultimately led to the intellectual ruin of Isaac Newton
Explanation
Throughout this essay, the author is primarily contrasting Newton’s scientific contributions and esteemed reputation with examples of his whimsy and foolishness in order to lead the reader to his main argument and conclusion. This is, “But, really it should tell us something about the nature of genius. It is not merely deep intelligence, but the willingness to try new things and the rejection of the fear of failure. Newton was not a genius in spite of his mistakes, but because of them.” So, the correct answer is “That Newton was a genius because of his willingness to make mistakes, not in spite of this.”
It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.
(1910)
What is the main idea in this text?
People should not criticize those who try and fail unless they have strived for greatness themselves
People should only attempt to do what they know they are capable of doing
People who have achieved great success are more likely to criticize those who have failed
Everyone who has ever succeeded has first experienced defeat
Explanation
Roosevelt points out the essential difference between those who try, even if they should fail. He identifies those only criticize as "cold and timid souls who neither know victory, nor defeat."
Passage adapted from Citizenship in a Republic, a speech given by Theodore Roosevelt on April 23, 1910.
The following question refers to the information contained in this passage.
The city of Dubrovnik has a rich and complicated history. For centuries it served as a halfway point between the Ottoman Empire and the Christian nations of Europe. After the Ottoman Empire invaded and conquered much of the Balkans, trade between the Empire and Christian Europe was largely forbidden, except through the independent city-state of Dubrovnik (at the time called Ragusa). Considering the massive amount of trade that poured through Dubrovnik on the way from the East to the Italian city-states and the nations of Northern Europe, it is no surprise that the city grew immensely wealthy and developed an autonomous character.
The main idea of this passage centers around .
Dubrovnik’s history and its concentration of wealth and trade
the tensions that existed between the Ottoman Empire and Christian Europe
the massive territorial expansion of the Ottoman Empire in the sixteenth century
Dubrovnik’s ability to defend itself and remain independent
the intellectual and scientific spirit of the city of Dubrovnik
Explanation
The main idea of this passage is that Dubrovnik has a unique history built around it’s status as an autonomous city-state where trade and wealth was concentrated. Although the tensions between the Ottoman Empire and Christian Europe are mentioned this is done more to demonstrate why Dubrovnik became a trading center. Dubrovnik’s ability to defend itself is not mentioned as a reason why it developed an independent character, nor is the intellectual or scientific spirit of the city.
Adapted from "On the Sonnet" by John Keats (1848)
If by dull rhymes our English must be chain'd,
And, like Andromeda, the Sonnet sweet
Fetter'd, in spite of pained loveliness;
Let us find out, if we must be constrain'd,
Sandals more interwoven and complete
To fit the naked foot of poesy;
Let us inspect the lyre, and weigh the stress
Of every chord, and see what may be gain'd
By ear industrious, and attention meet:
Misers of sound and syllable, no less
Than Midas of his coinage, let us be
Jealous of dead leaves in the bay wreath crown;
So, if we may not let the Muse be free,
She will be bound with garlands of her own.
Which of the following is most central to the speaker's argument?
The sonnet form
The translation of poetic works
The story of King Midas
The process by which sandals are made
The use of complex references in poetry
Explanation
"The sonnet form" is most central to the speaker's argument. The poem is urging poets to consider the inherent properties of language in order to make the poetic forms that they use best suit the language of the poems they compose. The sonnet form, an example of one of these strict poetic forms, is mentioned in the second line of the poem: "If by dull rhymes our English must be chain'd, / And, like Andromeda, the Sonnet sweet / Fetter'd." The poem never discusses the translation of poetic works or the use of complex references in poetry, and while sandals are mentioned ("Let us find out, if we must be constrain'd, / Sandals more interwoven and complete / To fit the naked foot of poesy,") they are mentioned as part of a figurative construction; the speaker is not literally wanting to make a pair of sandals; the "sandals" are here comparable to forms that better suit language. Similarly, while the story of King Midas is alluded to later in the poem ("Misers of sound and syllable, no less / Than Midas of his coinage"), it functions as part of a comparison and is not as central to the speaker's argument as is the sonnet form.
The following question refers to the information contained in this passage.
The religion of Judaism—for many hundreds of years after it had adopted monotheism—did not really deal with the notion of heaven and hell, or the afterlife. It was a fringe matter for theologians, but far from central to the practice of the religion. This all changed when a series of devastating wars and diseases dramatically reduced the population of the Jewish nation. Suddenly the belief in the afterlife, and the attention it was given by theologians, exploded. After all, these people had to have died for something, right? So, out of war and tragedy, grew one of the most influential ideas in human history—a monotheistic god who would guide all his people to life after death.
The author of this passage is primarily concerned with .
identifying the beginning of a Jewish belief in the afterlife
the rise of monotheism
discussing the effects of war on societal development
explaining the ancient polytheistic beliefs
outlining the history of the Jewish people
Explanation
The author of this passage is primarily concerned with identifying the beginning of a Jewish belief in the afterlife. He notes in the opening line that for hundreds of years the religion of Judaism did not really address the notion of the afterlife. He then goes on to talk about how this all changed when a large proportion of the Jewish population suddenly died or was killed in battle. This, the author claims, was the beginning of the Jewish belief in the afterlife. Although the author does suggest that war plays a role in societal development, this is not the main idea of the passage—nor is it to explain the rise of monotheism or the history of the Jewish people.
The following question refers to the information contained in this passage.
The religion of Christianity began as a religion of suffering, pity, and forgiveness. This was Christ’s dominant message: the majority of people live to suffer, and we must take pity on those who are suffering and forgive those who cause it. Thus Christianity, by its basic tenets, was not meant as a religion of power. It was a religion for the powerless, the common man. It was meant to provide meaning to suffering and to give a form of power (power over one's own emotions) to the powerless.
For the first few hundred years after Christ’s death, Christianity lived up to this message. It was widely embraced by the common people around the western world, in particular the Roman Empire, and by and large they were persecuted for it. This was the whole point: you will suffer for me and I will reward you when I return. As generations went by and Christ failed to return, the message was violently corrupted. Constantine the Great, a Roman Emperor in the fourth century, adopted Christianity as the official religion of his army and later of his empire. In doing so, he took Christianity from a fringe religion, with a growing flock of dedicated believers, to the official religion of the world’s largest empire. In so doing he also militarized the cross. He took the religion of Christianity away from suffering, pity, and forgiveness and imbued it with qualities that were never supposed to be there: dominance over your enemies; power; warfare; wealth. This would have untold consequences for the history of the western world and the history of the Christian faith. No longer did its believers have to cower in fear of their enemies, but also no longer were they truly adhering to the teachings of Christ.
The author of this passage is primarily concerned with
the corruption of the Christian message by Constantine the Great.
the inadequacy of Christ’s followers.
the degree to which Christianity affected the western world.
the ease with which Christianity spread around the Roman Empire.
the violence that has been done in Christ’s name.
Explanation
The author of this passage is primarily concerned with describing the corruption of the Christian message by Constantine the Great. The author spends the first part of the passage detailing how Christianity was meant to be understood, according to Christ’s teachings. He then goes on to show how this message was corrupted and manipulated by Constantine.
The following question refers to the information contained in this passage.
The feudal system arose during the Dark Ages of European history. After the fall of the western Roman Empire in the fifth century, there was a massive power vacuum in central and western Europe. This vacuum that was swiftly filled by invading barbarian tribes and settlers from further East. Wave after wave of people arrived in the fertile lands of central and western Europe and encouraged those who lived there either to seek protection or perish at the hands of the endless hordes of migrating people. This need for protection created the feudal system. A common family would pledge to work the lands of a Lord or Knight, and that person would in turn promise to defend the family whenever the land was invaded. This grew into a system fairly close to slavery, called serfdom, where the common man had no choice but to toil endlessly to further someone else’s wealth or perish out in the wider world by himself. It was born out of the violence and mass migration of the Early Dark Ages.
The author of this passage is primarily concerned with .
describing the situation that led to the rise of the feudal system
decrying the Fall of the Roman Empire
delineating the strengths of the feudal system
highlighting the horrors of the Dark Ages
explaining why the feudal system was ineffective
Explanation
The first line reads "The feudal system arose during the Dark Ages of European history." From there the author proceeds to talk about how the violent circumstances in Europe after the fall of the Roman Empire led to the creation of the feudal system. The author is focused on describing the situation that led to the rise of the feudal system, as can also be seen in the last line "it was born out of the violence and mass migration of the Early Dark Ages." Although the author suggests that the fall of the Roman Empire created a dangerous power vacuum he is not primarily concerned with decrying this state of affairs. Similarly, he does talk about the horrors of the Dark Ages, but this is done primarily to show why the feudal system was allowed to rise.