It’s all interesting stuff, but sometimes if we want to know more about it, we gotta read science books, like On the Origin of Species by Charles Darwin. He’s the guy who came up with this idea of evolution. I don’t know if he thought we all came from some sorta primordial soup though. I think he just mostly noticed that animals can change to fit their environment, and that eventually all of that species changes too. Here’s a paragraph from his book:

If we suppose any habitual action to become inherited—and I think it can be shown that this does sometimes happen—then the resemblance between what originally was a habit and an instinct becomes so close as not to be distinguished. If Mozart, instead of playing the pianoforte at three years old with wonderfully little practice, had played a tune with no practice at all, he might truly be said to have done so instinctively. But it would be the most serious error to suppose that the greater number of instincts have been acquired by habit in one generation, and then transmitted by inheritance to succeeding generations. It can be clearly shown that the most wonderful instincts with which we are acquainted, namely, those of the hive-bee and of many ants, could not possibly have been thus acquired.

What point is the author trying to make in this passage?

1. Talented people inherit their abilities.

2. It is difficult to know the difference between a learned habit and an inherited one.

3. Learned habits and inherited habits are the same thing.

4. Animals can not learn.

5. People do not have instincts.

Ay, I had to read this several times to understand it all. Immediately, I understood about Mozart. I know about him, he was a famous composer. Darwin says that he could play piano when he was tres años. That’s impressive, but it doesn’t mean he was born being able to play piano, right? He had to practice a little. So I guess Darwin’s trying to make a point about what you’re born with, and what you’re not born with. Like he says about what instincts get acquired by habit. So if you play piano a lot, then you eventually can play it just like it was an instinct. But it’s not an instinct you were born with, so you don’t necessarily pass it down to your children, like a basic instinct to find food.

That means number one isn’t right, because Darwin says right in the Mozart part that “it would be the most serious error” to guess that someone could inherit their talent just because their father or mother could do it. There’s a possibility that maybe they could inherit it, but that’s not what the author is saying here.

I think number two is right. Darwin says something really similar at the beginning: “If we suppose any habitual action to become inherited—and I think it can be shown that this does sometimes happen—then the resemblance between what originally was a habit and an instinct becomes so close as not to be distinguished.” Look at the last part. “…so as not to be distinguished.” That means they’re almost the same, so you can’t tell the difference. If you can’t tell the difference, then it would be hard to know which is one and which is the other. That’s exactly what number two says!

Number three is really close to number two. How do we know that Darwin isn’t just saying that there’s no difference at all? Well, He says that it would be wrong to say that instincts developed by habit in one generation are transmitted down to their children through inheritance. That’s making a strong point that they’re not the same. Otherwise it wouldn’t matter if your parents developed something from habit or from inheritance themselves. You’d have an equal possibility of inheriting either.

Number four and five are both wrong. It doesn’t say anything about either of these. Though, I think it’s important to realize that they’re wrong because the passage doesn’t talk about them. I know that animals can learn. People teach dogs tricks all the time! And I’m pretty sure everyone has instincts. That’s how we survive! But the question doesn’t ask about what’s true and what’s not true. It asks about what the author is saying. But here, we can see that he doesn’t say anything about that. He mostly talks about the difference between instincts and whether they’re developed in your life or inherited from your parents. That’s why I’m pretty sure that number two is right.

This was a really challenging question. If you could answer it right, you’re doing really well! Challenging yourself with difficult readings can make the kind of things you normally read a lot easier! It’s like running a little extra sometimes so that when it’s time for the big race, you know you can do it and more!

For more information about the GED test and GED test preparation, visit the GED Academy at  http://www.passGED.com.

Here’s an example of a GED question that asks about main idea… but instead of asking for a main idea (or a summary), it asks you what would be a good title. Well, why is that asking about a main idea? A title gives an overview of what you’re going to read. It picks out the most important idea or topic. So, the title is like the main idea. The passage comes from The Study Guide Zone. It’s pretty long… but a main idea means understanding the whole thing! Here’s a hint though… the first and last paragraphs are usually the most important, and can give you a main idea. You can even try just reading the first and last sentences of the paragraphs, and skimming through them. Here’s the first and last paragraphs to look at:

The Second Continental Congress was held May 10, 1775 in Philadelphia. George Washington became the commander of the Americans, mainly because it was felt he would be able to bring the Southern colonies into the fold. This Congress also drew up the Olive Branch petition, a peace offering made to the King of England. The Articles of Confederation were drawn up here; their emphasis on states’ rights proved to be a poor setup for organizing a comprehensive military strategy. This Congress created the Committees of Safety, a system for training community militias. This Congress created a bureaucracy for the purpose of organizing a navy and raising money. Finally, it was here that the colonists formally declared independence.

(…middle paragraphs removed…)

The issuing of the Declaration of Independence had effects both on the Revolutionary War and on world history at large. As far as its immediate effects, it changed the war in America from a war for liberty to a war for independence, by rhetorically emancipating America from Britain. It also opened a path for the French Revolution a few years later, a revolution motivated by the principles expressed in the Declaration. Revolutions in South America, Africa, and Asia have also used the Declaration of Independence as inspiration. In the subsequent history of the United States, the document would be used by abolitionists as an argument against slavery, and by suffragists as an argument for the right of women to vote.

And here’s the sample GED question that asks about the title… and is really asking for the main idea:

10. What would be the best title for this passage?
A: ‘George Washington and the Second Continental Congress’
B: ‘The Founding Fathers Smack Down King George II’
C: ‘The Three Parts of the Declaration of Independence’
D: ‘The Second Continental Congress and the Declaration of Independence’This question is asking you what title fits the passage best…and that means, it has the same main idea. So you need to pay attention to what the paragraphs are mostly about! What’s the point?

Answer A says George Washington and the Second Continental Congress. Well, if you just read the first paragraph, it talks about both those things…right away, so you might think this was the right answer. But if you skim through the whole thing, instead of reading just the beginning… let’s say I read the first and last sentences of the first and last paragraphs. I get:

The Second Continental Congress was held May 10, 1775 in Philadelphia.  … Finally, it was here that the colonists formally declared independence. …  The issuing of the Declaration of Independence had effects both on the Revolutionary War and on world history at large. … In the subsequent history of the United States, the document would be used by abolitionists as an argument against slavery, and by suffragists as an argument for the right of women to vote.

Hmmm!! It talks about the Continental Congress, and about the Declaration of Independence, but not about George Washington at all. If I skim the whole reading, I see that George Washington is really only mentioned once at the beginning. So, he’s not too important to the main idea! (With a little practice, you can quickly look through a reading looking for capital letters to find  names like “George Washington.”)

Answer B is “The Founding Fathers Smack Down King George II.” Well, the problem with saying that would be tone. Or point of view. I mean, would the writer really say “smack down”? It sounds like a pretty interesting title, maybe, but it doesn’t match the boring writing! I mean, straightforward writing. I don’t think the writer would ever say “SMACK DOWN.”

Answer C is “The Three Parts of the Declaration of Independence.” The reading doesn’t really talk about three parts of the Declaration… you can skim through looking for “Declaration of Independence,” to see if there’s anything that talks about three parts… I sure don’t see anything.

Answer D says “The Second Continental Congress and the Declaration of Independence.” Those are the things in those sentences I picked out, the first and last sentences of the paragraphs. Coincidence? No way! This one is what it’s about. And, it’s BORING (I mean, straightforward), just like the writing. So Answer D is right!

For more information on the GED test and GED test preparation, visit The GED Academy at http://www.passGED.com.