Critical Reasoning

A must be true

thanks

Hurry A. got it right!!

+1 for A

I think D will be correct but majority of guys over here are saying A.

Reason
A)It says nothing bout the environmental policies.
B)Weaken
C)Out of scope of argument
D)Covers all the scenario and supports the last line of the stimulus.
"that environmental policies that excessively restrict the use of natural resources may diminish the wealth necessary to adopt and sustain the policies that brought about these improvements"
E)Saying sum-thing out of the reasoning.

Can anybody please tell if my reasoning is correct or not.

ans: A

clearly indicates the relationship b/w use of natural resources and increase in wealth

akashkumar1987 wrote:I think D will be correct but majority of guys over here are saying A.

Reason
A)It says nothing bout the environmental policies.
B)Weaken
C)Out of scope of argument
D)Covers all the scenario and supports the last line of the stimulus.
"that environmental policies that excessively restrict the use of natural resources may diminish the wealth necessary to adopt and sustain the policies that brought about these improvements"
E)Saying sum-thing out of the reasoning.

Can anybody please tell if my reasoning is correct or not.

D is incorrect because it prompts that the current policies should not exist. if you go back to the passage, it says that the claims of people are given credibility because they want to use "some" natural resources (without too many restrictions on the use) to get wealth and in turn sustain the current policies.
so, the people are not against the policies. they are just against too many restrictions on the use of natural resources.

Answer choice [A] is the right one- it supports the people's argument about the use of natural resources to sustain their wealth (this wealth would be used to sustain the current policies).

Hope this helps

SO is A the correct answer?

Yes, A is the correct answer.

This is an LSAT question from the December 2004 test, the first logical reasoning section, question 19. It is a regular strengthen question.

Did you have any other questions about this one?

A for answer.

I said A. Here were my reasons:

B >> Use of advanced technology has nothing to do with the conclusion. The conclusion is more concerned with continually generating wealth for environmental programs.
C >> Again. No relation to the conclusion.
D >> The passage says nothing of the sort. It goes contrary to conclusion that there needs to be a fair usage of natural resources so as to generate wealth to fund these programs.
E >> This choice weakens the conclusion.

A >> Clearly reaffirms the conclusion by introducing information to suggest that the conclusion is correct.

Answer is A.


This is the conclusion: argue that environmental policies that excessively restrict the use of natural resources may diminish the wealth necessary to adopt and sustain the policies that brought about these improvements

You can actually treat this question as an assumption question. Answer A correctly filled the gap, telling us that nations' wealth are indeed coming from the use of natural resources, therefore restrict the use of it will diminish the wealth.

Type: Strengthen
Stimulus: better environment is attributed to environmentalists and those who reject the excessive restrict of using natural resources.
Look at choices:
A: correct - policies needed to be sustained by economic growth, which is driven by natural resources.
B: out of scope - "social programs"
C: opposite - weaken the argument
D,E: rejected by the same reason as C's

In short, choose A

A it is

i didnt understood the passage properly
but i can deduce that:-

A,B,C are out of context eliminated
D weakens the columnist reading

Thus answer should be E

Anyone can advice anything about some good materials regarding critical reasoning section