PT5.S3.Q3 - The United States government generally tries to protect

Jay TeeJay Tee Alum Member
edited April 2018 in Logical Reasoning 298 karma

I confidently chose D but after seeing that E is the correct answer, I can somewhat understand why. My issue is with trying to explain why D is wrong. I took D to mean that the fed gov's expenditures (i.e. allocations) for soil conversation in various states were inequitable. I thought this was main point based on the last sentence.

E's wording was too strong for me to choose it over D. I suppose the argument is actually saying that the fed gov just isn't spending enough money on soil conservation period.. primarily the author takes issue with the amount spent on nationwide conservation program. The author's not concerned with some states getting more conservation money than others, they're just upset that Florida gets $100,000 for soil conservation while the nat'l programs only get $50,000 for instance.. right?

Can anyone provide their thoughts or reasoning?

Comments

  • BinghamtonDaveBinghamtonDave Alum Member ⭐ 🍌🍌
    8716 karma

    Hello, I don't like this question because I think it boils down to a judgement call on the part of the student and I do not like questions that ask that of us. What I mean by this is when looking at (D) and (E) I think it asks of us: do the test writers want me to read the stimulus in a way to support (D) or do they want me to read the stimulus in a way that supports (E)?

    With that caveat in place, I think we could disqualify (D) as not being factually accurate due to the use of the word "inequitable." The definition of inequitable can be found here:
    https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/inequitable
    That word is describing something the argument did not do.

    (E) wouldn't be my first choice. (E) is describing something: "...should spend much more..." I'm weary of this, because it appears to be a conclusion not stated, but rather something we have to push out like and inference. Basically we have the following in the stimulus:
    -The government tries to protect resources
    -we have a problem with topsoil
    -the federal government has been doing an abysmal job funding protect/conservation efforts
    I don't think it is that much of a stretch given this fact pattern to say that "the federal government should try to increase funds for this problem." (E) is strongly worded for sure, but quite often, we are going to get an answer choice that is an approximation to our ideal choice.

    In summation: my main conclusion in regular every day speak for this problem would be: "the federal government is not doing enough to address this problem." I personally wouldn't go so far as to say: they should be doing much more."

    I hope this helps
    David

  • Jay TeeJay Tee Alum Member
    298 karma

    @BinghamtonDave said:
    Hello, I don't like this question because I think it boils down to a judgement call on the part of the student and I do not like questions that ask that of us. What I mean by this is when looking at (D) and (E) I think it asks of us: do the test writers want me to read the stimulus in a way to support (D) or do they want me to read the stimulus in a way that supports (E)?

    With that caveat in place, I think we could disqualify (D) as not being factually accurate due to the use of the word "inequitable." The definition of inequitable can be found here:
    https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/inequitable
    That word is describing something the argument did not do.

    (E) wouldn't be my first choice. (E) is describing something: "...should spend much more..." I'm weary of this, because it appears to be a conclusion not stated, but rather something we have to push out like and inference. Basically we have the following in the stimulus:
    -The government tries to protect resources
    -we have a problem with topsoil
    -the federal government has been doing an abysmal job funding protect/conservation efforts
    I don't think it is that much of a stretch given this fact pattern to say that "the federal government should try to increase funds for this problem." (E) is strongly worded for sure, but quite often, we are going to get an answer choice that is an approximation to our ideal choice.

    In summation: my main conclusion in regular every day speak for this problem would be: "the federal government is not doing enough to address this problem." I personally wouldn't go so far as to say: they should be doing much more."

    I hope this helps
    David

    Thanks David! That definitely helps. Sadly I had to google the definition for "inequitable" during BR because I wasn't sure what D was trying to say with that word. I found an example of it being used in a sentence to say "inequitable salaries for similar positions", so I thought maybe D is saying that some states were getting more conservation funds than other states and that was unfair.

    Upon re-reading D, I actually think I further confused expenditures with allocations.. D is saying that the fed gov's spending in various states for the purpose of conservation has been unfair, not that certain states getting more money than others from the fed gov is unfair. But like you mentioned, the argument doesn't do that; it isn't talking about whether anything's "unfair", it's just talking about the fed gov not spending enough money.

Sign In or Register to comment.