Skip to main contentSkip to solution

I used a smartphone GPS to find my way through the cobblestoned maze of Geneva's Old Town, in search of a handmade machine that changed the world more than any other invention. Near a 13th-century cathedral in this Swiss city on the shores of a lovely lake, I found what I was looking for: a Gutenberg printing press. "This was the Internet of its day at least as influential as the iPhone," said Gabriel de Montmollin, the director of the Museum of the Reformation, toying with the replica of Johann Gutenberg's great invention. Before the invention of the printing press it used to take four monks up to a year to produce a single book. With the advance in movable type in 15th-century Europe, one press could crank out 3,000 pages a day. Before long, average people could travel to places that used to be unknown to them with maps! Medical information passed more freely and quickly, diminishing the sway of quacks. The printing press offered the prospect that tyrants would never be able to kill a book or suppress an idea. Gutenberg's brainchild broke the monopoly that clerics had on scripture. And later, stirred by pamphlets from a version of that same press, the American colonies rose up against a king and gave birth to a nation.

So, a question in the summer of this 10th anniversary of the iPhone: has the device that is perhaps the most revolutionary of all time given us a single magnificent idea? Nearly every advancement of the written word through new technology has also advanced humankind. Sure, you can say the iPhone changed everything. By putting the world's recorded knowledge in the palm of a hand, it revolutionized work, dining, travel and socializing. It made us more narcissistic - here's more of me doing cool stuff! - and it unleashed an army of awful trolls. We no longer have the patience to sit through a baseball game without that reach to the pocket. And one more casualty of Apple selling more than a billion phones in a decade's time: daydreaming has become a lost art.

For all of that, I'm still waiting to see if the iPhone can do what the printing press did for religion and democracy. The Geneva museum makes a strong case that the printing press opened more minds than anything else, it's hard to imagine the French or American revolutions without those enlightened voices in print.

Not long after Steve Jobs introduced his iPhone, he said the bound book was probably headed for history's attic. Not so fast. After a period of rapid growth in e-books, something closer to the medium for Chaucer's volumes has made a great comeback.

The hope of the iPhone, and the Internet in general, was that it would free people in closed societies. But the failure of the Arab Spring, and the continued suppression of ideas in North Korea, China and Iran, has not borne that out. The iPhone is still young. It has certainly been "one of the most important, world-changing and successful products in history," as Apple CEO. Tim Cook said. But I'm not sure if the world changed for the better with the iPhone as it did with the printing press or merely, changed.

The main conclusion of the passage is that the new technology has

Solution

āœ… Correct Option: 2

The author spends most of the passage showing how the printing press opened minds, spread ideas, and helped democracy. Then asks: has the iPhone done the same thing? The answer comes in the final paragraph.

From passage: "The hope of the iPhone, and the Internet in general, was that it would free people in closed societies. But the failure of the Arab Spring, and the continued suppression of ideas in North Korea, China and Iran, has not borne that out."

From passage: "But I'm not sure if the world changed for the better with the iPhone as it did with the printing press or merely, changed."

Author's thought process -> Printing press opened minds and spread freedom -> iPhone was hoped to do the same -> But it hasn't succeeded in freeing closed societies -> So iPhone hasn't been as successful as printing press in opening minds.


🟠 Option 1 -> scope-error -> Focuses only on advantages vs disadvantages, but the main conclusion isn't about weighing pros and cons. It's about comparing effectiveness in opening minds specifically.

🟢 Option 2 -> captures the main conclusion accurately -> Directly matches the author's comparison between iPhone and printing press effectiveness in opening people's minds and spreading freedom.

🟠 Option 3 -> context-shift -> The author never says iPhone is disappointing because of rapid change. The disappointment is about not achieving the same mind-opening success as printing press.

🟠 Option 4 -> partial-truth -> Yes, the passage mentions daydreaming became a "lost art," but this minor point isn't the main conclusion. The main conclusion is about comparative success in opening minds.

Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Left arrow: Previous question
  • Right arrow: Next question
  • S key: Jump to solution
  • Q key: Jump to question