RC Question 16 Explanation
DISCUSSION: The author agrees that increasing returns exist (first sentence of paragraph 5). He claims that economists ignored increasing returns not because the idea was wrong, but because the math was hard.
___________
- The author never says the pin factory idea is wrong.
- The author agrees that increasing returns exist (first sentence of paragraph 5). There is a conflict between the pin factory and the invisible hand, but the author accepts both ideas as true descriptions of competing processes.
- The ‘curiosity’ here refers to the idea that the pin factory ought to be accepted as a true economic idea – the author has no doubts on that point. They accept the pin factory as a accurate metaphor.
- Why would the author repeatedly mention the pin factory if he felt indifferent about the idea?
- CORRECT. See the first sentence of paragraph 5. The author agrees that increasing returns occur in many industries. The author speaks positively of the pin factory idea throughout the passage, and never says it is wrong.
Hey Graeme,
I just wanted to add, and please correct me if I am wrong, but I supported answer choice E even more with (line 59) when the author says the Pin Factory model finally got the rigor needed for a ‘respectable’ model. I viewed that as the author somewhat accepting of the model despite it’s previous flaws. Please let me know if this is wrong because that is how I supported this answer.
That’s part of it too. In my view references throughout whole passage supports E. I just cited lines 50-51 because they show the author views increasing returns as obvious, so we need some sort of model to describe them.
In these explanations I try to make one citation or argument to prove/disprove answers, but there are often others. Complete explanations would look like those in the LSAT superprep: really, really long.