Hi SAT Aspirants, welcome to AKVTutorials. As you know SAT (Scholastic Assessment Test) is a standard test, used for taking admission to undergraduate programs of universities or colleges of United States. SAT is developed and published by the College Board, an organization in United States, administered by the Educational Testing Service. Are you searching for SAT Reading Practice Questions? Then, in this article of AKVTutorials, you will get SAT Reading Practice Online Test 70 | SAT 2024 Online Tutor AMBiPi
SAT Reading Practice Passage
SAT Reading Practice Test Comprehensive Passage
Passage 1 is adapted from Judith Butler, “Hannah Arendt’s Challenge To Adolf Eichmann” was published in 2011 and Passage 2 is adapted from Tony Judt’s “The ‘Problem of Evil’ in Postwar Europe” in 2008 NY Review of Books. The following 13 multiple choice questions are based on the passage below.
| Fifty years ago the writer and philosopher Hannah Arendt | |
| witnessed the end of the trial of Adolf Eichmann, one of the | |
| major figures in the organization of the Holocaust. Covering | |
| the trial Arendt coined the phrase “the banality of evil”, a | |
| Line 5 | phrase that has since become something of an intellectual |
| cliché. But what did she really mean? | |
| One thing Arendt certainly did not mean was that evil had | |
| become ordinary, or that Eichmann and his Nazi cohorts had | |
| committed an unexceptional crime. Indeed, she thought the | |
| Line 10 | crime was exceptional, if not unprecedented, and that as a |
| result it demanded a new approach to legal judgment itself. | |
| There were at least two challenges to legal judgment that she | |
| underscored, and then another to moral philosophy more | |
| generally. The first problem is that of legal intention. Did the | |
| Line 15 | courts have to prove that Eichmann intended to commit |
| genocide in order to be convicted of the crime? Her argument | |
| was that Eichmann may well have lacked “intentions” insofar | |
| as he failed to think about the-crime he was committing. She | |
| did not think he acted without conscious activity, but she | |
| Line 20 | insisted that the term “thinking” had to be reserved for a |
| more reflective mode of rationality. Arendt wondered | |
| whether a new kind of historical subject had become possible | |
| with national socialism, one in which humans implemented | |
| policy, but no longer had “intentions” in any usual sense. To | |
| Line 25 | have “intentions” in her view was to think reflectively about |
| one’s own action as a political being, whose own life and | |
| thinking is bound up with the life and thinking of others. So, | |
| in this first instance, she feared that what had become “banal” | |
| was non-thinking itself. This fact was not banal at all, but | |
| Line 30 | unprecedented, shocking, and wrong. By writing about |
| Eichmann, Arendt was trying to understand what was | |
| unprecedented in the Nazi genocide — not in order to | |
| establish the exceptional case for Israel, but in order to | |
| understand a crime against humanity, one that would | |
| Line 35 | acknowledge the destruction of Jews, Gypsies, gay people, |
| communists, the disabled and the ill. | |
| Just as the failure to think was a failure to take into account | |
| the necessity and value that makes thinking possible, so the | |
| destruction and displacement of whole populations was an | |
| Line 40 | attack not only on those specific groups, but on humanity |
| itself. As a result, Arendt objected to a specific nation-state | |
| conducting a trial of Eichmann excusively in the name of its | |
| own population. At this historical juncture, for Arendt, it | |
| became necessary to conceptualize and prepare for crimes | |
| Line 45 | against humanity, and this implied an obligation to devise |
| new structures of international law. So if a crime against | |
| humanity had become in some sense “banal” it was precisely | |
| because it was committed in a daily way, systematically, | |
| without being adequately named and opposed. In a sense, by | |
| Line 50 | calling a crime against humanity ‘banal”, she was trying to |
| point to the way in which the crime had become for the | |
| criminals accepted, routinized, and implemented without | |
| moral revulsion and political indignation and resistance. | |
| What had became banal — and astonishingly so — was the | |
| Line 55 | failure to think. Indeed, at one point the failure to think is |
| precisely the name of the crime that Eichmann commits. We | |
| might think at first that this is a scandalous way to describe | |
| his horrendous crime, but for Arendt the consequence of | |
| non-thinking is genocidal, or certainly can be. | |
| Line 60 | The question of how human beings could do this to each |
| other — and above all the question of how and why one | |
| European people (Germans) could set out to exterminate | |
| another (Jews) — were, for an alert observer like Arendt, | |
| self-evidently going to be the obsessive questions facing the | |
| Line 65 | continent. That is what she meant by “the problem of evil.” |
| In one sense, then, Arendt was of course correct. But as so | |
| often, it took other people longer to grasp her point. It is true | |
| that in the aftermath of Hitler’s defeat and the Nuremberg | |
| trials lawyers and legislators devoted much attention to the | |
| Line 70 | issue of “crimes against humanity” and the definition of a |
| new crime — “genocide” — that until then had not even had a | |
| name. But while the courts were defining the monstrous | |
| crimes that had just been committed in Europe, Europeans | |
| themselves were doing their best to forget them. And in that | |
| Line 75 | sense at least, Arendt was wrong, at least for a while. |
| Far from reflecting upon the problem Of evil in the years that | |
| followed the end of World War Il, most Europeans turned | |
| their heads resolutely away from it. Today we find this | |
| difficult to understand, but the fact is that the Shoah — the | |
| Line 80 | attempted genocide of the Jews of Europe — was for many |
| years by no means the fundamental question of postwar | |
| intellectual life in Europe (or the United States). Indeed, | |
| most people, intellectuals and others, ignored it as much as | |
| they could. Why? | |
| Line 85 | In Eastern Europe there were four reasons. In the first place, |
| the worst wartime crimes against the Jews were committed | |
| there; and although those crimes were sponsored by Germans | |
| there was no shortage of willing collaborators among the | |
| local occupied nations: Poles, Ukrainians, Latvians, Croats, | |
| Line 90 | and others. these was a powerful incentive in many places to |
| forget what had happened, to draw a veil over the worst | |
| horrors. Secondly, many non-Jewish East Europeans were | |
| themselves victims of atrocities (at the hands of Germans, | |
| Russians, and others) and when they remembered the war | |
| Line 95 | they did not typically think of the agony of their Jewish |
| neighbors but of their own suffering and losses. Thirdly, most | |
| Of Central and Eastern Europe came under Soviet control by | |
| 1948. The official Soviet account of World War Il was of an | |
| anti-fascist war — or, within the Soviet Union, a “Great | |
| Line 100 | Patriotic War.” For Moscow, Hitler was above all a fascist |
| and a nationalist. His racism was much less important. The | |
| millions of dead Jews from the Soviet territories were | |
| counted in Soviet losses, of course, but their Jewishness was | |
| played down or even ignored, in history books and public | |
| Line 105 | commemorations. And finally, after a few years behind the |
| iron curtain, the memory of German occupation was replaced | |
| by that of Soviet oppression. The extermination of the Jews | |
| was pushed deeper into the background. |
SAT Reading Comprehension Practice Test Questions
SAT Reading Practice Test Question No 1
The author of passage I indicates the best understanding of the phrase “the banality Of evil” is that
Option A : extremities in this case seem cliche and outdated.
Option B : evil has nothing noble or conspicuous.
Option C : acts of crimes become normal and tasteless.
Option D : such atrocity becomes customary and routine.
SAT Practice Test Answer No 1
Show/Hide Answer
Option D : such atrocity becomes customary and routine.
SAT Reading Practice Test Question No 2
Which choice provides the strongest support for the answer to the previous question?
Option A : Lines 6-9 (“But…crime”)
Option B : Lines 16-21 (“Her…rationality”)
Option C : Lines 49-53 (“In.. .resistance”)
Option D : Lines 54-56 (“What… commits”)
SAT Practice Test Answer No 2
Show/Hide Answer
Option C : Lines 49-53 (“In.. .resistance”)
SAT Reading Practice Test Question No 3
The author of passage I suggests that by characterizing Nazi’s evil acts as banality, Arendt may
Option A : underestimate the involvement level of other non-Jewish people in the Holocaust.
Option B : cause nauseating effects and public rage by failing to define clearly the term genocide.
Option C : leave others the initial impression that she believes the crimes by Nazi are commonplace.
Option D : indemnify herself by putting more conscientious efforts to locate the real Legal Intentions.
SAT Practice Test Answer No 3
Show/Hide Answer
Option C : leave others the initial impression that she believes the crimes by Nazi are commonplace.
SAT Reading Practice Test Question No 4
Based on the information of the passage I, which choice can be inferred about the legal intention” of Eichmann?
Option A : After the Nuremberg Trials, deliberate and intentional killing needs not to be proven in genocide cases.
Option B : Before the Holocaust, the court normally needs to establish criminal intention to convict Eichmann.
Option C : Eichmann probably had never thought of or planned for the mass killing when he executed the orders.
Option D : Eichmann definitely carried out his actions in killing with clear conscious activities.
SAT Practice Test Answer No 4
Show/Hide Answer
Option B : Before the Holocaust, the court normally needs to establish criminal intention to convict Eichmann.
SAT Reading Practice Test Question No 5
The word “reflective” in line 21 can be replaced by
Option A : deliberate.
Option B : thoughtful.
Option C : considerate.
Option D : imaginative.
SAT Practice Test Answer No 5
Show/Hide Answer
Option A : deliberate.
SAT Reading Practice Test Question No 6
As indicated in line 41, Arendt objected to base the trial in a specific nation-state because
Option A : the crimes were committed across Europe and the world.
Option B : the atrocities of the crimes were unprecedented in history.
Option C : the crimes were committed on the entire human.
Option D : the legitimacy of specific nation-state was not strong enough.
SAT Practice Test Answer No 6
Show/Hide Answer
Option C : the crimes were committed on the entire human.
SAT Reading Practice Test Question No 7
On which of the following points would the authors of both passages most likely agree?
Option A : The crime against humanity was overshadowed by the rules of Soviet after the war.
Option B : The crime against humanity was committed widely and tacitly by. many during the war.
Option C : The term “genocide” should be coined to become the central issue of fundamental concerns for Europeans.
Option D : Many European sympathizers of Nazi should be condemned harshly in the history studies.
SAT Practice Test Answer No 7
Show/Hide Answer
Option B : The crime against humanity was committed widely and tacitly by. many during the war.
SAT Reading Practice Test Question No 8
How would the author of passage I most likely respond to the “problem oferil” in line 65 of passage 2?
Option A : The crimes against humanity shall be clarified as a new concept for international juridical system.
Option B : Such a crime of evil is never truly recognized formally by the European intellectuals.
Option C : The problem of evil does not mean the crimes targeted against Jews, Gypsies, gay people etc.
Option D : It is obviously a collective consciousness in play for criminals like Eichmann in committing the crimes.
SAT Practice Test Answer No 8
Show/Hide Answer
Option A : The crimes against humanity shall be clarified as a new concept for international juridical system.
SAT Reading Practice Test Question No 9
Which choice best summarizes the main purposes of these two passages, respectively?
Option A : The first passage lays out the historical background for a serious crime, while the second paragraph analyies several key aspects of the historical context.
Option B : The first passage identifies the rationales behind a terminology for crime, while the second passage analyies the factors for intentional ignoring of such a crime.
Option C : The first passage focuses on the contribution made by one important figure in categorizing a crime, while the second provides different opinions towards her work.
Option D : The first paragraph exposes the hidden parts of a specific historical issue, while the second passage provides explicit explanations for such a confusion.
SAT Practice Test Answer No 9
Show/Hide Answer
Option B : The first passage identifies the rationales behind a terminology for crime, while the second passage analyies the factors for intentional ignoring of such a crime.
SAT Reading Practice Test Question No 10
How would the author of passage 1 consider the reasoning put forward by the author of passage 2 as to why “Arendt was wrong” in lines 72-75?
Option A : It is acceptable because the genocide is indeed unprecedented in history.
Option B : It is mistaken because defining the genocide is an imperative.
Option C : It is unnecessary because the crime against humanity shall be clarified.
Option D : It is reasonable because it may provide another direction of thinking.
SAT Practice Test Answer No 10
Show/Hide Answer
Option C : It is unnecessary because the crime against humanity shall be clarified.
SAT Reading Practice Test Question No 11
The word “they” in line 95 is in Italics in order to
Option A : emphasize the responses of non-Jewish East Europeans to crimes against Jews.
Option B : treat the non-Jewish East Europeans differently as another group of victims.
Option C : separate the Jews from non-Jewish in the conceptualized ethnic groups in war.
Option D : explain there is no significant differentiation between one group of sympathizers from another.
SAT Practice Test Answer No 11
Show/Hide Answer
Option A : emphasize the responses of non-Jewish East Europeans to crimes against Jews.
SAT Reading Practice Test Question No 12
The author of passage 2 is most likely to comment on the concept of “failure to think” in line 55 that
Option A : the non-Jewish collaborators in Europe would tend to ignore the logic of it.
Option B : the courts across the continent would not come to consensus without it.
Option C : it might seem elusive to many other people for a long period of time.
Option D : et could apply in the same strength to the Soviet oppression in the aftermath of the WWII.
SAT Practice Test Answer No 12
Show/Hide Answer
Option C : it might seem elusive to many other people for a long period of time.
SAT Reading Practice Test Question No 13
According to the passage 2, what can be reasonably inferred about the Soviet oppression in Europe?
Option A : The Soviets committed genocide as well after the war.
Option B : The Central Europe did not come under the Soviet control.
Option C : It had the similar nationalist characteristic as Nazi.
Option D : German devastation in war was as severe as that of the Soviet.
SAT Practice Test Answer No 13
Show/Hide Answer
Option C : It had the similar nationalist characteristic as Nazi.
