-
abhirup1711
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 66
- Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 2:27 pm
- Followed by:2 members
4. Some environmentalists question the prudence of exploiting features of the environment, arguing that
there are no economic benefits to be gained from forests, mountains, or wetlands that no longer exist.
Many environmentalists claim that because nature has intrinsic value it would be wrong to destroy such
features of the environment, even if the economic costs of doing so were outweighed by the economic
costs of not doing so.
Which one of the following can be logically inferred from the passage?
(A) It is economically imprudent to exploit features of the environment.
(B) Some environmentalists appeal to a noneconomic justification in questioning the defensibility of exploiting features of the environment.
(C) Most environmentalists appeal to economic reasons in questioning the defensibility of exploiting features of the environment.
(D) Many environmentalists provide only a noneconomic justification in questioning the defensibility of exploiting features of the environment.
(E) Even if there is no economic reason for protecting the environment, there is a sound noneconomic justification for doing so.
Please provide a sound explanation of your reasoning.
there are no economic benefits to be gained from forests, mountains, or wetlands that no longer exist.
Many environmentalists claim that because nature has intrinsic value it would be wrong to destroy such
features of the environment, even if the economic costs of doing so were outweighed by the economic
costs of not doing so.
Which one of the following can be logically inferred from the passage?
(A) It is economically imprudent to exploit features of the environment.
(B) Some environmentalists appeal to a noneconomic justification in questioning the defensibility of exploiting features of the environment.
(C) Most environmentalists appeal to economic reasons in questioning the defensibility of exploiting features of the environment.
(D) Many environmentalists provide only a noneconomic justification in questioning the defensibility of exploiting features of the environment.
(E) Even if there is no economic reason for protecting the environment, there is a sound noneconomic justification for doing so.
Please provide a sound explanation of your reasoning.
