PT131.S1.Q7 > Question

SECTION 1 · lr

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25

SECTION 2 · lr

SECTION 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8

PASSAGE 2

Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15

PASSAGE 3

Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22

PASSAGE 4

Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27

The author concludes that any solution to global environmental problems must involve reducing human demand. She supports her argument by asserting that all global environmental problems are caused by an imbalance between people's demands on the environment and its limited supply. She further tells us that there is no upward limit on the demands people can make of the environment.

The author makes several notable assumptions:

(1) She assumes that human demand is currently high just because it has no upper limit. It’s like assuming someone is speeding purely because they drive a sports car.

(2) She further assumes that Earth’s sustainable supply is already at its limit. Just because there is an upper limit doesn’t mean it is currently being met.

This answer choice would weaken the argument. If supply and demand balance out long-term, then a potential issue to global ecological problems could be waiting until human demand balances out with the supply of Earth’s resources.

Negating this answer choice tells us it is impossible to determine the limitations of Earth’s supply, but this doesn’t make the limit disappear. Demand could still outpace supply, but we just won’t know what the exact limit of the demand is.

In order for all solutions to require reducing current demand, this answer choice must be true. If current demand does not exceed Earth’s sustainable supply, then there is no need to reduce human demand—simply increase the supply up to Earth’s sustainable limit.

The conclusion doesn’t state that it must be possible to fix Earth’s environmental problems. It only tells us that any potential solution requires reducing demand, regardless of whether or not this is feasible.

We already know Earth has a hard limit on its supply. The argument still works regardless of whether or not human demand further decreases that limit.

PrepTest 131 - Section 1 - Question 7

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action