It is an odd but indisputable fact that the seventeenth-century English women who are generally regarded as among the forerunners of modern feminism are almost all identified with the Royalist side in the conflict between Royalists and Parliamentarians known as the English Civil Wars. Since Royalist ideology is often associated with the radical patriarchalism of seventeenth-century political theorist Robert Filmer—a patriarchalism that equates family and kingdom and asserts the divinely ordained absolute power of the king and, by analogy, of the male head of the household—historians have been understandably puzzled by the fact that Royalist women wrote the earliest extended criticisms of the absolute subordination of women in marriage and the earliest systematic assertions of women's rational and moral equality with men. Some historians have questioned the facile equation of Royalist ideology with Filmerian patriarchalism; and indeed, there may have been no consistent differences between Royalists and Parliamentarians on issues of family organization and women's political rights, but in that case one would expect early feminists to be equally divided between the two sides.
Catherine Gallagher argues that Royalism engendered feminism because the ideology of absolute monarchy provided a transition to an ideology of the absolute self. She cites the example of the notoriously eccentric author Margaret Cavendish (1626–1673), duchess of Newcastle. Cavendish claimed to be as ambitious as any woman could be, but knowing that as a woman she was excluded from the pursuit of power in the real world, she resolved to be mistress of her own world, the "immaterial world" that any person can create within her own mind—and, as a writer, on paper. In proclaiming what she called her "singularity," Cavendish insisted that she was a self-sufficient being within her mental empire, the center of her own subjective universe rather than a satellite orbiting a dominant male planet. In justifying this absolute singularity, Cavendish repeatedly invoked the model of the absolute monarch, a figure that became a metaphor for the self-enclosed, autonomous nature of the individual person. Cavendish's successors among early feminists retained her notion of woman's sovereign self, but they also sought to break free from the complete political and social isolation that her absolute singularity entailed.
Which of the following, if true, would most clearly undermine Gallagher's explanation of the link between Royalism and feminism?
Because of their privileged backgrounds, Royalist women were generally better educated than were their Parliamentarian counterparts.
Filmer himself had read some of Cavendish's early writings and was highly critical of her ideas.
Cavendish's views were highly individual and were not shared by the other Royalist women who wrote early feminist works.
The Royalist and Parliamentarian ideologies were largely in agreement on issues of family organization and women's political rights.
The Royalist side included a sizable minority faction that was opposed to the more radical tendencies of Filmerian patriarchalism.
题目分析:
文章推断题:以下哪一点最能削弱CG关于保皇党和女权联系的解释?
(CG认为保皇党产生了女权主义者)
选项分析:
A选项:由于特权背景,保皇党女性比议会党女性受到更好的教育:与教育无关。
B选项:Filmer自己读了一些C的书并且强烈不满:这并不能解释女权是否起源于保皇党。
C选项:正确。C的观点很独立,也没有被保皇党的女性看到:如果保皇党的女性没有看到C的作品,那保皇党出现女权主义者的几率就会降低,削弱了保皇党和女权主义的联系。
D选项:保皇党和议会党在家庭、女性政权问题上很一致:无关。
E选项:保皇党有一小部分人反对父权主义:这个加强了CG的观点。
share the view指的是认同该观点,不是被别人看到,答案翻译有问题
CG对此的解释中,以MC的理念为例,但C选项的意思是,MC的理念只是他个人的理念,并没有被其他女权主义者认同和接受,所以undermine了CG关于royalist产生feminism的解释
D选项,这道题undermine的是royalist产生feminism,至于parliamentarian是否产生(或怎么产生)feminism与此题无关
不是要undermine“为什么feminist几乎都是royalist而非parliamentarian”这件事,而是undermine “royalist是怎么产生feminism”这件事
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论
解释里C的翻译有点问题
整个第二段在解释为什么早期女权主义者归为保皇派
G的解释是:君主制的以君主为中心,转变到女人以自己为中心,所以女权主义者归为保皇派
C选项,C的作品是很独立,并且别的早期女权主义者也没看过
说明,女权主义者归为保皇派,是因为其他原因,不是G的原因,所以削弱
monarchy君主制;君主政体
C应该是指只有CG有这种想法,而其他写保皇党的女性没有这个想法
engender产生
rc
这是一道cr题了
C选项:正确。C的观点很独立,也没有被保皇党的女性看到:如果保皇党的女性没有看到C的作品,那保皇党出现女权主义者的几率就会降低,削弱了保皇党和女权主义的联系。
Catherine Gallagher argues that Royalism engendered feminism because the ideology of absolute monarchy provided a transition to an ideology of the absolute self.She cites the example of the notoriously eccentric author Margaret Cavendish (1626–1673),
这里C是作为例子,说明Royalism是怎么引起了feminism的。削弱的方向就是C不具备代表性
又是一个没看完选项内容就直接排除选项的错误...
!一定要看完选项内容!
!尤其是貌似觉得五个选项都不对的时候!
定位:Catherine /Gallagher/ argues that Royalism engendered feminism because the ideology of absolute monarchy provided a transition to an ideology of the absolute self.
C选项:Gallagher利用Cavendish的例子表现royalism和feminism之间的关系,如果C的观点并不是feminism的观点,则Gallagher的关于保皇派和女权主义者之间的连接将会被削弱
D选项:错选D了,要看清楚这不是G的观点!!!假如是的话,女权主义会被分为两个部分,从而对两者关系起到削弱作用
E选项:C的理论讲更有说服力的是保皇派的代表,从而加强两者关系
谈谈自己的理解
A Royalist women受教育程度更高,无关,不能对Royalism和 feminism因果关系产生影响
B 某人的观点不影响客观事实
C 正确。同一群体中其他人不认同MC的观点。从样本代表性入手削弱。注意,本选项和文章最后一句话不冲突,最后一句话:MC的后继early feminists保留了她关于具有独立主权的自我的观点,但是试图破除绝对singularity引发的孤立。表明后继者不同意singularity,不完全认同MC的观点。
D 错选项。P和R在家庭组织结构和女性政治权利上的观点相同,提供了为什么feminists支持R的另一种解释,可以削弱“feminists支持R是因为R导致feminism”的观点,但是并不能削弱R和 feminism 本身的因果关系
E 无关
我记得xdf老师说过rc里的削弱直接削弱前提。这里的p:absolute monarchy;c:Royalism engendered feminism。直接说g的观点没有代表性来削弱
问: sizable minority faction这里怎么理解?
相当小的一部分
相当大的一个少数派吧。。。不管怎么理解对本题似乎影响都不大
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论
定位P2第一句absolute self,应该是被攻击的点吧?对应C中的highly individual
应该就是这样
absolute self指的是君主政体的特点,不是只是作者的观点过于个人化。这道题没有定位词哈
问: sizable minority faction这里怎么理解?
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论
感觉BDE很好排除,为什么A不对呢 ,我选的是A。那些女性是皇族受过良好教育,所以有先进的女权主义思想啊。并不是因为君主制导致个人意识的觉醒。感觉也可以削弱呢。求解答
CG通过举Cavendish的例子来论述absolute monarchy概念的存在导致absolute self概念的出现 但C项里说Cavendish的观点是直接来自她自己 削弱CG论述里absolute monarchy的前提?
我觉得是要削弱这个原因,而不是给出一个新的原因
题目到底问的是削弱CG的结论还是削弱CG提供的原因,如果是削弱原因应该是E他因啊,如果不是那就是C,我纠结了很久,仔细看题目意思不是削弱原因吗?
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论