LR Question 24 Explanation
QUESTION TEXT: Agricultural economist: We can increase …
QUESTION TYPE: Principle – Justify
CONCLUSION: If we want to keep economic growth going, we should radically change our farming methods.
REASONING: Economic growth requires increasing agricultural production. We can only increase production without harming biodiversity if we abandon conventional methods.
ANALYSIS: The stimulus gives us a fact:
To get both (1) increased agricultural production and (2) biodiversity, we need radical changes to agriculture.
But why should we care about preserving biodiversity? The conclusion assumes that we shouldn’t simply choose:
More agricultural production + less biodiversity.
The hidden principle there is that we shouldn’t pursue economic growth if doing so sacrifices biodiversity.
If you add that principle, the reasoning works:
- Economic growth requires more agricultural production
- More production without biodiversity loss requires abandoning conventional agriculture
- We shouldn’t sacrifice biodiversity
- Therefore, if we want economic growth, we should change agricultural techniques
___________
- The argument is trying to increase agricultural production, not reduce it. This principle points in the opposite direction.
- CORRECT. The argument assumes that if we want economic growth, we should avoid sacrificing biodiversity, which means we need the only method that allows both goals: radically changing agricultural techniques.
- This tells us when economic growth should continue, but says nothing about biodiversity or why agricultural techniques should be modified.
- Saying two goals are equally important doesn’t tell us what to do when they conflict. You could still choose to sacrifice biodiversity.
- This makes radical modification necessary only when it increases production. But the argument modifies agriculture to preserve biodiversity while increasing production, not because it necessarily increases production more than conventional methods.
Leave a Reply