Q2 - Denise: Crime will be reduced

[mshinners]

Question Type:
ID the Agreement (be careful you didn't think this was an ID the DISagreement question - those are more common)

Stimulus Breakdown:
D and R both talk about reducing crime. D thinks it's necessary to make crime certain/sufficiently severe to make people think twice. R thinks it'd be best to educate people so they have better options.

Answer Anticipation:
They both talk about options (D says decide; R says choice), so the answer will probably deal with that.

Correct answer:
(A)

Answer choice analysis:
(A) Bingo. D says people can decide against crime if the punishment is certain and sever. R says, with education, we can get people to choose another path.

(B) Out of scope. Neither speaker rates the different issues facing modern society.

(C) Out of scope. Neither speaker talks about fairness (R is close, but her fairness is about educational opportunities, not the punishment).

(D) Half scope. R arguably would agree with this, but D doesn't talk about economic need.

(E) Half scope. D says certain and severe punishment is necessary to reduce crime, so she'd agree here. R doesn't talk about anything being required to reduce crime, and she also doesn't talk punishment.

Takeaway/Pattern: Be sure you know if you're in an ID the Agreement or Disagreement question, since it completely changes what answer you should be looking for. Also, in ID the Agreement questions, focus on similar language that shows up in both statements.

#officialexplanation

[gilad.bendheim]

Why is the answer (A) here? It seems that Denise would agree because she thinks criminals 'consider' committing a crime and can 'decide' to not commit one. But it seems like Reshmi would agree as well. Reshmi says that we need to make education more available so that those 'who once viewed criminal activity as the only means of securing a comfortable lifestyle' would thereby be able choose something else. But why does that fact that crime is perceived as the only way to secure a comfortable lifestyle mean that a criminal has no choice in the matter? Couldn't a would-be criminal choose to forgo a comfortable lifestyle and instead live a crime-free though difficult life? The implication that a 'comfortable lifestyle' in the only possible sort of lifestyle seems to me to be quite a stretch.

Thanks

[maryadkins]

Read the question again--it's asking what they AGREE on!

Be careful. Not all of these types of questions are asking for a disagreement.

[gilad.bendheim]

Wow - totally missed that. thanks!