+0
Here is another Sentence Completion question,

It is an error to regard the imagination as a mainly_ force; if it destroys and alters, it also _ hitherto isolated beliefs, insights, and mental habits into stronly unified systems.
A visionary -----------conjures
B beneficial-----------converts
C revolutionary-------fuses
D negative-------------shunts
E synthetic--------------integrates

I chose the choice E. But the answer is C.

:-s I don't get what "revolutionary force" means when regarding the imagination? And if it refers to imagination, shouldn't "it destroys and alters" be "it is destroyed and altered"?

Thank you
+0
The key is in "destroy and alters".

A "revolution" always destroys and alters old things, and creates new things.
But "imagination" is not a simple revolution because it integrates/fuses old things into unified systems.

paco
Comments  
Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies
Thank you, paco.

But I am still a little confused.

Does it mention "old things" here? Does "old things" really have something to do with "isolated beliefs, insights, and mental habits"?
because it integrates/fuses old things into unified systems


I don't see "isolated beliefs, insights, and mental habits" refers to "old things" here. You know, if they are so-called "old things", we'd have the new things to contrast with them, right? But there is nothing regarding the new things in this sentence.

Sorry, maybe I am not that smart. I don't get it.

For me, it in "it destroys and alters" refers to imagination/revolutionary force. And the sentence creator uses the active voice here to deliver the sence of 'passive voice'. Just my stupid thought. Emotion: smile
Hello Jeff

Yeah, I feel you would have a good reason in doubting what I said.

Both "destroy" and "alter" are transitive verbs but this sentence doesn't give the objective nouns for those verbs. So when I was writing the previous message, I took this sentence as;

[1] It is an error to regard the imagination as a mainly revolutionary force, because, even if the imagination destroys and alters hitherto isolated beliefs, insights, and mental habits, the imagination also fused them into strongly unified systems.

But this paraphrase sounds weird because it is impossible to assume the things destroyed and altered be used as the material to be fused into a system.

So maybe we have to assume the writer completely omitted some words that should be the object of the verbs "destroy" and "alter". If we assume the words are "something old", the paraphrase would be like;

[2] It is an error to regard the imagination as a mainly revolutionary force, because, even if the imagination destroys and alters partly something old, the imagination on the other hand fused hitherto isolated beliefs, insights, and mental habits, into strongly unified systems.

How about this paraphrase? Does it sound still odd to you?

paco
Thank you, paco. It does make sense.
Since the imagiantion is a revolutionary force, it can destroy and alter something huh. Emotion: smile
Try out our live chat room.
It does make sense. Thank you.