Read the following comprehension passage carefully and then answer the question that follows by choosing the best option out of the four alternatives. Reporters and city officials gathered at a Chicago railroad station one afternoon in 1953 to welcome the winner of the 1952 Nobel Peace Prize. A very tall man, about six feet four inches, with bushy hair and a large moustache, stepped down from the train as cameras flashed and officials stretched out their hands. While many people told him how honoured they felt to meet him, the man politely thanked them and, asking to be excused for a moment, looked over their heads, walked through the crowd, and went to help an elderly Black woman who was struggling with two heavy suitcases. He picked up her bags with a smile, escorted her to a bus, helped her to get on, and wished her a safe journey. Then he returned to the reception party and said, "Sorry to have kept you waiting." Not many white people at that time would have behaved in this humble and considerate way. The man was Dr Albert Schweitzer, the famous missionary doctor who devoted his life to serving poor people in Africa. In response to this action, a member of the reception committee remarked admiringly to a reporter, "That is the first time I have ever seen a sermon walking." From this incident, we can conclude that Dr Albert Schweitzer ____.

Introduction:
This question again uses the same passage about Dr Albert Schweitzer at a Chicago railway station, but now it focuses on his attitude towards people of different races. You are asked to infer whether he was prejudiced or not, and in what way. The exam is testing your ability to interpret social attitudes and values from a short narrative, not just to pick literal words from the text.

Given Data / Assumptions:
- Dr Schweitzer is a widely honoured Nobel Peace Prize winner and a famous missionary doctor.
- At the station, he leaves an important welcoming crowd in order to help an elderly Black woman with heavy suitcases.
- The passage comments that not many white people would have done such a thing at that time.
- The narrator emphasises that he devoted his life to serving poor people in Africa, who were largely non white populations.
- We assume the social background of the 1950s, when racial discrimination and prejudice were common in many places.

Concept / Approach:
The concept here is racial prejudice versus humanitarian equality. A prejudiced person treats people differently because of race, while an unprejudiced person treats everyone with equal respect. The question asks you to decide whether Dr Schweitzer showed prejudice against Whites or Blacks or whether he was free from such prejudice. His behaviour towards the elderly Black woman in a racially tense context provides strong evidence of his beliefs and values.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Notice that the person whom Dr Schweitzer leaves the crowd to help is an elderly Black woman, not someone influential.Step 2: Remember that the passage states, "Not many whites would have done what he did," which highlights how unusual his behaviour was.Step 3: Understand that he treats the woman with dignity and kindness, carrying her bags, escorting her, and wishing her a safe journey.Step 4: Recognise that a racist or prejudiced white person in that time and setting would usually ignore or look down on a Black stranger.Step 5: Conclude that he was not prejudiced against Blacks; instead, he respected and helped her as a fellow human being.

Verification / Alternative check:
If he had been prejudiced against Blacks, he would have avoided close contact, especially in a public place in front of officials and reporters. Instead, he chose to help her even when it meant stepping away from dignitaries. There is also no suggestion that he held any negative attitude towards White people, so it would be wrong to say that he was prejudiced against Whites. His lifelong work in Africa further confirms that he treated non white communities with compassion and equality.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Option A, "was not prejudiced against Whites", is irrelevant because the passage does not show any situation where he might have discriminated against Whites; he is himself a White man being honoured by them. Option C, "was prejudiced against Whites", is incorrect and unsupported, since he cooperates politely with the officials. Option D, "was prejudiced against Blacks", directly contradicts the central incident where he helps an elderly Black woman with great kindness. Only option B, "was not prejudiced against Blacks", fits the evidence.

Common Pitfalls:
Some students read too quickly and notice only that the woman is Black, without linking this to the social context of racial prejudice mentioned in the line about "not many whites". Others may misinterpret the options and think that any mention of race implies prejudice, which is not true. The key is to focus on his respectful act of service, which is a clear sign of equality and lack of prejudice. Always base your answer on what the person does, not on vague assumptions.

Final Answer:
The passage shows that Dr Albert Schweitzer treated the elderly Black woman with equal respect and kindness, so he was not prejudiced against Blacks.