PT #31. S 2. #11

(Personal Statement Examples, Advice, Critique, . . . )
User avatar
cloudhidden
Posts: 194
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2011 9:29 am

PT #31. S 2. #11

Postby cloudhidden » Thu Aug 23, 2012 4:59 pm

I can see how (E) can explain the paradox, but why not (A)? Granted, we already know that corn produced more food than the other grains from the stimulus, but couldn't the people just have considered this fact more important than the nutrition problems? The amount of food produced would have been even larger than the initial returns from corn before it became the staple crop. Is (A) wrong because the answer to a resolve the paradox question must bring in substantially new information?

User avatar
dowu
Posts: 8334
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 9:47 pm

Re: PT #31. S 2. #11

Postby dowu » Thu Aug 23, 2012 5:26 pm

cloudhidden wrote:I can see how (E) can explain the paradox, but why not (A)? Granted, we already know that corn produced more food than the other grains from the stimulus, but couldn't the people just have considered this fact more important than the nutrition problems? The amount of food produced would have been even larger than the initial returns from corn before it became the staple crop. Is (A) wrong because the answer to a resolve the paradox question must bring in substantially new information?


The reason A is wrong is because it really doesn't do anything to resolve the paradox. In short, it's actually an unnecessary comparison. So WHAT if the people who rely on corn produced more food than their ancestors; it doesn't matter.

Be careful of answer choices that make comparisons to other things when a comparison has no bearing on the argument/question itself.

Hope that helps!

User avatar
CorkBoard
Posts: 3216
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 6:05 pm

Re: PT #31. S 2. #11

Postby CorkBoard » Thu Aug 23, 2012 10:21 pm

Wrong forum.




Return to “Law School Personal Statements”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.