Reading Comprehension

The promise of finding long-term technological solutions to the problem of world food shortages seems difficult to fulfill. Many innovations that were once heavily supported and publicized, such as fish-protein concentrate and protein from algae grown on petroleum substrates, have since fallen by the wayside. The proposals themselves were technically feasible, but they proved to be economically unviable and to yield food products culturally unacceptable to their consumers. Recent innovations such as opaque-2 maize, Antarctic krill, and the wheat-rye hybrid triticale seem more promising, but it is too early to predict their ultimate fate.
One characteristic common to unsuccessful food innovations has been that, even with extensive government support, they often have not been technologically adapted or culturally acceptable to the people for whom they had been developed. A successful new technology, therefore, must fit the entire sociocultural system in which it is to find a place. Security of crop yield, practicality of storage, palatability, and costs are much more significant than had previously been realized by the advocates of new technologies. For example, the better protein quality in tortillas made from opaque-2 maize will be of only limited benefit to a family on the margin of subsistence if the new maize is not culturally acceptable or is more vulnerable to insects.
The adoption of new food technologies depends on more than these technical and cultural considerations; economic factors and governmental policies also strongly influence the ultimate success of any innovation. Economists in the Anglo-American tradition have taken the lead in investigating the economics of technological innovation. Although they exaggerate in claiming that profitability is the key factor guiding technical change-they completely disregard the substantial effects of culture-they are correct in stressing the importance of profits. Most technological innovations in agriculture can be fully used only by large landowners and are only adopted if these profit-oriented business people believe that the innovation will increase their incomes. Thus, innovations that carry high rewards for big agribusiness groups will be adopted even if they harm segments of the population and reduce the availability of food in a country. Further, should a new technology promise to alter substantially the profits and losses associated with any production system, those with economic power will strive to maintain and improve their own positions. Since large segments of the populations of many developing countries are close to the subsistence margin and essentially powerless, they tend to be the losers in this system unless they are aided by a government policy that takes into account the needs of all sectors of the economy. Therefore, although technical advances in food production and processing will perhaps be needed to ensure food availability, meeting food needs will depend much more on equalizing economic power among the various segments of the populations within the developing countries themselves.








Which of the following best describes the organization of the first paragraph?
(A) A suggestion is made and arguments in its favor are provided.
(B) A criticism is levied and an alternative proposal is suggested.
(C) A generalization is advanced and supporting evidence is provided.
(D) An example is analyzed and general conclusions are derived from it.
(E) A position is stated and evidence qualifying it is provided.


OA is C
I am confused between C and E.Please tell me the difference between generalization and position.

Please use spoiler for the OA. Knowing the OA beforehand you become biased in your analysis.

Position : author will state that he agrees or disagrees with a certain phenomenon.

Generalization : is an example is given or a situation is described.

Now if we look closely at the first line

The promise of finding long-term technological solutions to the problem of world food shortages seems difficult to fulfill.

Now here the most important word is SEEMS . This word suggest that author is conveying what appears to be a situation.

If he would have said :

The promise of finding long-term technological solutions to the problem of world food shortages IS difficult to fulfill.

Then we could have considered this as the authors view and in that case it would have been a POSITION .

I guess option E is half right half wrong option...
I do not think i can make any differentiation in generalization and position but option E says that the position is stated and then qualified... but no where in the 1st para is the position of the author is qualified...

I just looked up the BTG forum and got to know that to qualify is to add limitations on something...
For example,

I am hungry today. -> General statement..
I am hungry today, but I will eat only non-vegetarian stuff today..

So, the part after but limits or qualifies whatever is mentioned before...
This sort of situation is not mentioned in the 1st para and yes.. as the 1st poster mentioned, the word seems might make this as a generalization !!