Replace the underlined portion with the answer choice that results in a sentence that is clear, precise, and meets the requirements of standard written English.

Victory is the ultimate goal of any general, but too precise a focus can clouds a leader's judgement.

Replace the underlined portion with the answer choice that results in a sentence that is clear, precise, and meets the requirements of standard written English. One of the answer choices reproduces the underlined portion as it is written in the sentence.

He said he wouldn’t have jumped into the murky lake if someone else hasn’t jumped before him.

Replace the underlined portion with the answer choice that results in a sentence that is clear, precise, and meets the requirements of standard written English

The cheese was given to the child by the parent, who then complained that it was too smelly to eat. 

Replace the underlined portion with the answer choice that results in a sentence that is clear, precise, and meets the requirements of standard written English.

In order to correcting John's essay, the professor needed to examine a very obscure theory on paleontology. 

Replace the underlined portion with the answer choice that results in a sentence that is clear, precise, and meets the requirements of standard written English.

Were you to have chosen that restaurant, we would have to dress up.

Choose the answer that best corrects the underlined portion of the sentence. If the underlined portion is correct as written, choose "NO CHANGE."

If I was a parent, I would travel with my children so that they could see the world.

Choose the answer that best corrects the underlined portion of the sentence. If the underlined portion is correct as written, choose "NO CHANGE."

Ms. Jackson requires that a student who wishes to earn an "A" in Physics completes at least three lab reports each quarter.

“The Dark Ages?” by Matthew Minerd (2016)

There are two different ways to consider the so-called “Dark Ages.” On the one hand, you can think of the period directly after the fall of the Roman Empire, when civilization began to collapse throughout the Western Empire. On the other hand, you can consider the period that followed this initial collapse of society. It is a gross simplification too use the adjective dark to describe the civilization of either of these periods.

As regards the first period it is quite a simplification to consider this period to be a single historical moment. It is not as though the civilization switched off like a lightbulb. At one moment light and then, at the next, dark. Instead, the decline of civilization occurred over a period of numerous decades and was, in fact, already occurring for many years before the so-called period of darkness. Thus, the decline of civilization was not a rapid collapse into barbarism, but instead, was a slow alteration of the cultural milieu of a portion of Europe. Indeed, the Eastern Roman Empire retained much of it’s cultural status during these years of decline!

More importantly, the period following the slow collapse of the Western Empire was much less “dark” than almost every popular telling states. Indeed, even during the period of decline, the seeds for cultural restoration was being sown. A key element of this cultural revival were the formation of monastic communities throughout the countryside of what we now know as Europe. Although these were not the only positive force during these centuries, the monasteries had played an important role in preserving and advancing the cause of culture through at least the thirteenth century and arguably until the Renaissance.

How should the underlined and bolded selection be changed?

“On the Nature of Belief”

Belief and faith often are critiqued in a scientific culture.  It can seem that mere belief is a replacement for science made available to soothe the ignorant masses.  There is some truth to such accusations, and many people do use belief as a screen to cover their own ignorance about the truths of reality.  Everyone should be aware, however, that almost every single human being have these kinds of “blind spots.” We all live with many things that we merely believe, all of which are so central to ones world view.

Even if we set aside all such types of beliefs, there still remains a broad terrain of human life in which faith and belief remain—even if we ignore all religious matters whatsoever.  Imagine the scientist who’s work on brain neurons depends upon many discoveries made by many other people. Yes, if it were possible, it would be better for such a person to know all of the details that they accept merely at the word of other scientists.  In all cases, seeing directly is more fulfilling than merely hearing about something.

However, is the scientist better off when he or she knows only what they have experienced directly. Although it is preferable that he or she knows such facts. However, it is impossible to investigate everything.  Sometimes, one must extend one’s own vision with the vision of someone else.  In a way, the person who thus “takes it on faith” gains a further vision.

Such faith always relies upon the credibility of the person who shares the experience, of course.  For one person to believe on faith what another person says, it is presupposed that the other person is not a liar and actually could have experienced the matter in question.  This means that even the “scientific believer” must take the risk of placing credibility in someone who has witnessed things that he or she has not seen. While this does not vindicate every kind of faith that people have had, it does provide a telling sign that faith, as such, is not always the refuge of the ignorant.  Indeed, it is an important part of all of our lives, even the lives of scientists, who’s daring and investigative work is rarely criticized as being a refuge for ignorance!

Choose the answer that best corrects the bolded and underlined portion of the passage. If the bolded and underlined portion is correct as written, choose "NO CHANGE."

“On the Nature of Belief”

Belief and faith often are critiqued in a scientific culture.  It can seem that mere belief is a replacement for science made available to soothe the ignorant masses.  There is some truth to such accusations, and many people do use belief as a screen to cover their own ignorance about the truths of reality.  Everyone should be aware, however, that almost every single human being have these kinds of “blind spots.”  We all live with many things that we merely believe, all of which are so central to ones world view.

Even if we set aside all such types of beliefs, there still remains a broad terrain of human life in which faith and belief remain—even if we ignore all religious matters whatsoever.  Imagine the scientist who’s work on brain neurons depends upon many discoveries made by many other people.  Yes, if it were possible, it would be better for such a person to know all of the details that they accept merely at the word of other scientists.  In all cases, seeing directly is more fulfilling than merely hearing about something.

However, is the scientist better off when he or she knows only what they have experienced directly.  Although it is preferable that he or she knows such facts. However, it is impossible to investigate everything.  Sometimes, one must extend one’s own vision with the vision of someone else.  In a way, the person who thus “takes it on faith” gains a further vision.

Such faith always relies upon the credibility of the person who shares the experience, of course.  For one person to believe on faith what another person says, it is presupposed that the other person is not a liar and actually could have experienced the matter in question.  This means that even the “scientific believer” must take the risk of placing credibility in someone who has witnessed things that he or she has not seen. While this does not vindicate every kind of faith that people have had, it does provide a telling sign that faith, as such, is not always the refuge of the ignorant.  Indeed, it is an important part of all of our lives, even the lives of scientists, who’s daring and investigative work is rarely criticized as being a refuge for ignorance!

Choose the answer that best corrects the bolded and underlined portion of the passage. If the bolded and underlined portion is correct as written, choose "NO CHANGE."