PT 44, LR section 1, Q. 13 Forum

[flash21]

The solution to any...


This is the type of SA question that really tears me apart. If anyone who is exceptional at SA's or has a good way of tackling a question like this would be willing to walk me through it I'd appreciate it a lot. I've done some diagramming which looks like:

EP thats not Gov't mismanag. ----> change consumer habits ---> economically enticing

-------------------------------------

therefore, not many EP's solved unless things become economically enticing.

At the time of me writing this, I have not looked at the answers. I think the answer may be (C) and the only reason is because it seems to connect this diagram I made, but i know this is terrible reasoning, I don't have a solid reason for thinking why it is. Its hard for me to find the gap here - is it that changes can even be made economically enticing in the first place? Or is this more of a trap answer necessary assumption?

Going to try to justify eliminating the other answers now and will go check the answer key, will be checking back at this thread

[flash21]

After thinking about this more, I switch my answer to A. I think C may actually have been a necessary assumption.

SO, why did I pick A?

Because the hole in the argument I think may be the fact that we don't know whether or not few serious ecological problems occur because of government mismanagement. But A takes care of the by adding the assumption that it does.

BUT again , I could be wrong soo ..gona go check the answer key