Self-study
Agricultural economist: Support We can increase agricultural production without reducing biodiversity, but only if we abandon conventional agriculture. █████ ██ ██ ██████ ██ ███████ ████████ ███████ █████ ████████ ██████████ ████████████ ███████████ ██ ██████ █████████ ██████ ████████████ ███████████
Summary
The author concludes that if we want to sustain economic growth, then we should radically change agricultural techniques.
Why?
Because of the following 2 premises:
(1) Increase agricultural production & NOT reduce biodiversity → abandon conventional agriculture
(2) sustain economic growth → increase agricultural production
Premise (2) is contained within the sentence that also contains the conclusion. (Even though the whole last sentence is highlighted as the conclusion, the part in between the commas is actually a premise.)
Notable Assumptions
The premises allow us to conclude that if we want to sustain economic growth, but NOT reduce biodiversity, then that requires we abandon conventional agriculture.
But notice that the conclusion leaves out the part about not reducing biodiversity. It asserts that if we want to sustain economic growth, then we have to abandon conventional agriculture (”radically change agricultural techniques”). What if, however, we want to sustain economic growth, but we’re OK with reducing biodiversity? Why would that require abandoning conventional agriculture?
The author is either assuming (1) we shouldn’t reduce biodiversity, (2) if we sustain economic growth, we shouldn’t reduce biodiversity, or (3) sustaining economic growth itself requires abandoning conventional agriculture regardless of whether we reduce biodiversity.
24.
Which one of the following ███████████ ██ ██████ ████ █████ ██ ███████ ███ ████████████ ███████████ ██████████
a
Agricultural production should ██ ███████ ██ █████ ██ █████ ████████ █████████████
This tells us that if reducing agricultural production increases biodiversity, then we should reduce agricultural production. But we’re trying to prove that sustaining growth, which requires increasing agricultural production, requires abandoning conventional agriculture. So the conclusion concerns a situation in which increasing agricultural production is required. A principle about when we should reduce agricultural production doesn’t strengthen the argument.
b
Economic growth should ███ ██ ███████ ██ ███ ███████ ██ █ ████ ██ █████████████
This helps establish that if we sustain economic growth, we should radically change our agricultural techniques. We know from the premises that sustaining economic growth while at the same time not reducing biodiversity requires abandoning conventional agriculture. According to (B), if we sustain economic growth, we should not reduce biodiversity. So it follows that if we sustain economic growth — which (B) establishes should be accompanied by our desire not to reduce biodiversity — then that requires abandoning conventional agriculture.
c
Economic growth should ██ █████████ ████ ██ ████ ██ ████████████ ██████████ █████████ ██ █████████
This doesn’t tell us anything about not reducing biodiversity. So it doesn’t give us any information that would help connect sustaining economic growth to abandoning conventional agriculture.
d
Preserving biodiversity is ██ ████ █████████ ████ ██████████ ████████████ ███████████
If (D) were true, that leaves open the possibility that agricultural production could be more important than preserving biodiversity. And that opens the possibility that we might not need to abandon conventional agriculture in order to sustain economic growth. Maybe we can sustain economic growth and be OK with reducing biodiversity? In that case, the premise about abandoning conventional agriculture doesn’t trigger. (D) doesn’t help show why sustaining economic growth does require abandoning conventional agriculture.
e
Agricultural techniques should ██ █████████ ████████ ████ ██ █████ ██ █████ ███████ ███ ██████ ██ █████ ██ ███ ████████ ████████████ ███████████
(E) tells us about a necessary condition (”only if”) in order for it to be appropriate to radically modify agricultural techniques. But that would only allow us to prove when we should NOT radically modify techniques. It doesn’t help us prove that sustaining economic growth requires us to radically modify techniques.