PT23.S4.Q14 - the debate over the environmental crisis

AnthonyScalia

Hi guys! I wanted to get some feedback on this RC question.

The prompt asks for the main idea and the right answer is that 'the views of ecologists and economic growth advocates have only recently become polarized.'

To me, that phrase implies that the passage is about recency. It implies that the passage is primarily dedicated towards explaining a long history of no polarization that has but little time ago turned into a polarized dichotomy.

I agree that the passage accomplishes this, but to me, this accomplishment was used as a template for the author rather than his/her explicit, or even primary purpose.

I detected notes of author view, such as in line 11 when he describes the recent polarization as "sad." On top of that, the way the author describes both sides seems to indicate that he favors the previous attitudes towards the issue, consistent with what Marsh and the Enlightenment thinkers believe. I almost got a sense of sarcasm in how he described the implications of Clements' equilibrium model. The author claims that the model became a "mystique," environmental interference was "taboo," wilderness was "adored." These descriptions made me believe that the author saw followers of this mentality to be radical, cult-like, trendy, and perhaps a form of the "tree-hugger" stereotype.

Back to the first paragraph, the final sentence talks about how the "sad effects" make it "difficult for industry to respond to impact analyses that demand action." This came across as having sympathy for contemporary industries, being pinned down in this polarized climate where (as we would later read) before they could act in harmony with environmentalists and have productive conversations based in compromise and understanding.

With all of that in mind, I was very quick to eliminate D, an answer choice with no reflection of the author's argument/bias, and way too much (in fact, pretty much 100%) emphasis on the mere fact that such a change is recent. Who cares if it's recent? You didn't need to give your opinion and write four paragraphs only to tell us that this polarization is recent. You could easily switch the dates mentioned in the passage, and the meaning would barely change. It would just be polarized ----> not polarized instead of not polarized ----> polarized.

I picked E because I thought it captured the author's sentiment and reflected an idea that the entire passage built to establish. A lot of the passage's content contributes to that idea, while only a few small distinctions affirm that the change happened to be recent.

https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-23-section-4-passage-3-passage/
https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-23-section-4-passage-3-questions/