2024 CSAT — Q43

Locate. Find the passage’s account of the parent–adolescent conflict: the adolescent thinks himself “quite capable of managing his own affairs”; the parents are “filled with parental solicitude, which is often a disguise for love of power”; parents think adolescent moral problems are “peculiarly their province”; but their opinions are “so dogmatic that the young seldom confide in them, and usually go their own way in secret.”

Test (negation test + the three-boundary check). Statement 1 — the adolescent is uncomfortable with parents because they are dominating and assertive. Map to the text: “love of power” ⇒ dominating; “so dogmatic” ⇒ assertive; “seldom confide in them” ⇒ not comfortable. The causal direction (dominating/dogmatic → don’t confide) is the passage’s own. The people and things named, the cause-and-effect chain, and the level of certainty all hold → valid. Negate it (they confide freely despite the dogmatism) and the passage’s account breaks. Statement 2 — the adolescent “does not have much respect for parents” “of modern times.” “Respect” never appears; “modern times” is not in the passage; going one’s “own way in secret” is reticence, not disrespect. It brings in an attitude the passage never names → invalid.

Eliminate by anatomy. (b)/(c) admit Statement 2 — a claim the passage never actually makes, one that introduces actors the passage never names — “lack of respect” and “modern times” are read into a passage about confidence and secrecy. (d) wrongly rejects the fair-inference Statement 1. The transferable rule: “don’t confide / go their own way in secret” is about reticence, not disrespect — don’t let a behaviour slide into an attitude the text never names. Key: (a).

Statement 1: the passage says parental solicitude “is often a disguise for love of power” and that the parents’ opinions are “so dogmatic that the young seldom confide in them, and usually go their own way in secret” — dominating (love of power) + assertive (dogmatic) causing the young not to confide is a fair inference inside the passage → valid. Statement 2: the passage says nothing about “respect,” and “modern times” is not in the text — going “their own way in secret” is reticence, not disrespect (ENTITY boundary) → invalid. So 1 only → (a).

Statement 1 — uncomfortable because parents are dominating and assertive. The passage roots the conflict in parental “love of power” (dominating) and “dogmatic” opinions (assertive), which lead the young to not confide and to act in secret (discomfort). The statement restates this causal account fairly. Negate it and the passage’s explanation of the conflict collapses. Valid.

Statement 2 — adolescents of modern times lack respect for parents. The passage says nothing about respect, and “modern times” is not in the text. Acting “their own way in secret” reflects lost confidence and reticence, not disrespect. Negate it (they do respect their parents) and the passage is unaffected. Invalid (adds entities outside the text).

Answer: (a) 1 only.

The discriminating move is behaviour-vs-attitude. The passage describes a behaviour (the young don’t confide, act in secret) caused by dominating/dogmatic parenting — which supports Statement 1. It never describes the attitude of disrespect, nor restricts the claim to “modern times” — which is why Statement 2 fails. Valid-assumption questions reward keeping the inference inside the passage’s nouns: secrecy is in the text, “respect” is not.