Hi, so there's a couple issues with D & E, hopefully some points will resonate.
D - from quick glance, 2 aspects are sticking out. First, do we know outsiders must be prevented? What if all that's necessary is that insiders need to not listen to outsiders. What if all that's needed is for insiders to take other steps, but not necessarily "prevent" outsiders. This statement is narrow. Additionally, we don't know if participation in efforts is the same as imposition. Impose is much more negative, and severe, while participation is rather broad.
E - so in the stimulus it lays out independence being a critical thing. Does this mean the more of independence, the more progress? Not necessarily. Consider your favorite blend of coffee & creamer. The more creamer, is not always the case of being better cup of coffee. Similar in that sense, just because we know something helps progress, we don't know that more of it will improve progress by even more.
Full disclaimer, I got to A through POE. With A though, you can see they don't make the participation to imposition gap. Also, it's taking the conditional statement in the stimulus and contraposing it. So, any imposition threatens independence and therefore progress would translate: Impose--> threaten independence --> threaten progress. So not threaten progress --> /impose
I got down to D & A and also struggled to identify why AC A was right.
The stim says that outsiders may provide advice, but imposition is not OK. with that in mind, AC D goes too far by saying outsiders must be prevented all together. They can be a part of the process, but they can only give advice & not impose. A makes that stipulation whereas D just says they should be prevented full stop.
Comments
Hi, so there's a couple issues with D & E, hopefully some points will resonate.
D - from quick glance, 2 aspects are sticking out. First, do we know outsiders must be prevented? What if all that's necessary is that insiders need to not listen to outsiders. What if all that's needed is for insiders to take other steps, but not necessarily "prevent" outsiders. This statement is narrow. Additionally, we don't know if participation in efforts is the same as imposition. Impose is much more negative, and severe, while participation is rather broad.
E - so in the stimulus it lays out independence being a critical thing. Does this mean the more of independence, the more progress? Not necessarily. Consider your favorite blend of coffee & creamer. The more creamer, is not always the case of being better cup of coffee. Similar in that sense, just because we know something helps progress, we don't know that more of it will improve progress by even more.
Full disclaimer, I got to A through POE. With A though, you can see they don't make the participation to imposition gap. Also, it's taking the conditional statement in the stimulus and contraposing it. So, any imposition threatens independence and therefore progress would translate: Impose--> threaten independence --> threaten progress. So not threaten progress --> /impose
Hope any of this helps!
I got down to D & A and also struggled to identify why AC A was right.
The stim says that outsiders may provide advice, but imposition is not OK. with that in mind, AC D goes too far by saying outsiders must be prevented all together. They can be a part of the process, but they can only give advice & not impose. A makes that stipulation whereas D just says they should be prevented full stop.