<p>The prevailing attitude in seventeenth-century England was that schools and universities should teach nothing that would discredit the established religion or the authority of kings and magistrates.</p>
<p>A) Should teach nothing that would
D) Should only teach that which will not</p>
<p>NOTE
Ok, this is the only question I missed out of the 49 Q's, but my question is: there is nothing wrong with D right? The only reason the answer is A is because D is longer and A is more precise and concise?</p>
<p>I think D is technically wrong because "would" is conditional/imperfect and "will" is future tense. I mean, imagine the original sentence with "will" instead of "would" -- it sounds pretty weird, since we're talking about the seventeenth century. </p>
<p>"Should only teach that which would not" would be right, although wordy.</p>
<p>Actually, I'm not positive if it's conditional or imperfect or both...</p>
<p>But yeah, it's because of the "should" and the fact that it's referring to the past. </p>
<p>Here's a kinda crappy example:<br> I shouldn't have eaten anything that would make me sick.
as opposed to I shouldn't have eaten anything that will make me sick. </p>
<p>BUT if the first part were present tense:<br> I shouldn't eat anything that will make me sick.</p>
<p>...is right because "I shouldn't" is referring to actions that are (potentially) in the future.</p>