Q20 - Industrial engineer: Some people

[kmewmewblue]

I chose (C) because other choices were not attractive.

The way (C) put the "equally destructive" confused me though.
I don't know if I could explain why exactly I'm confused, but let me try.

The idea: Pumping CO2 into ocean
Industrial engineer opinion: NOT equally destructive
Environmentalists opinion: equally destructive

But,the way they put "Worrying that pumping~another,equally destructive, form is unfounded."
Blue is Environmentalists opinion, and red could be Industrial engineer's opinion. Because "equally destructive" is modifying "Pumping CO2."
Obviously, in this case, this was also Environmentalist's opinion.
But, my question is that depends on how we perceive this phrase could lead to be correct or wrong answer choices.

If I take this "equally destructive" as Industrial engineer opinion, then I could think "Nope, Industrial engineer does NOT think this is equally destructive."

Horrible explanation, sorry. But if anybody could guess what I am talking about, please help me.Thanks

[ohthatpatrick]

I think I followed your confusion. There are a couple structural tips to Main Conclusion questions that may have made your question a moot point, so let me start with those.

1. Most Main Conclusion questions make your task of finding the conclusion more complicated by having an opposing position within the stimulus. The most prevalent form for Main Conclusion questions is

i. someone else's position / point of view / reasoning
ii. but/yet/however [our author disagrees] (<-- conc)
iii. support for our author's conclusion

2. Always bracket off a phrase from the stimulus that you would consider the main conclusion (you can literally draw brackets or mentally "bracket" off a phrase). When you look for an answer, compare it back to the phrase you bracketed off.

Take a second to decide for this stimulus which phrase you would bracket.

....

I would go with "This worry is unfounded". It is the industrial engineer's opinion, and the idea that follows it is a supporting premise.

"This worry is unfounded" uses some borrowed language (this is typical of Main Conclusion conclusions).

What is "this worry"? The previous sentence explains "simply exchanging one form of pollution for an equally destructive form".

So we want an answer that says "simply exchanging one form of pollution for an equally destructive form" "is unfounded".

(C) certainly delivers.

So back to your question of "how do I interpret this answer"? Since these answer choices are supposed to represent the engineer's main point (his overall thought/opinion), it seemed like you were confused about where to draw the line in the wording of (C) between the opinion the author was disagreeing with and the author's opinion itself.

The answer is really grammatical in nature.

If I say "Swimming is fun", I'm expressing an opinion about the action of swimming:
Swimming = fun

If I tack a bunch of modifiers onto the action of swimming, such as"Swimming in a pool of Jello while the cast and crew of Saturday Night Live judge your Gilbert Gotfried impression is fun", I'm still just saying
Swimming in a pool of Jello while the cast and crew of Saturday Night Live judge your Gilbert Gotfried impression = fun

So for (C) the engineer's opinion is that:
worrying that pumping carbon dioxide into the deep ocean to reduce global warming would simply exchange one form of pollution for another, equally destructive, form = unfounded

I hope this helps. Interesting question.

[kmewmewblue]

Wow. Thank you so much!!!

[elizabeth.baber]

Doesn't C simply restate what is already mentioned in the sentence. Does it not stand to reason that from the engineer's statements one would conclude that some CO2 should be pumped into the ocean. In other words, I fail to see why E is not the correct answer. I was undecided between C and E and finally (incorrectly) chose E.

[ohthatpatrick]

It seems like you're interpreting your task here as "What can be Inferred", when the question stem is "What DID the author conclude".

Our task here is merely to Identify the conclusion (like, physically draw brackets around it in the paragraph) and then pick whichever answer choice is the most equivalent re-statement.

So when you say "Doesn't C simply restate what is already mentioned in the sentence." ... YES!

That's why we love it so.

(E) is a reasonable speculation to make about this author. If he thinks the environmentalist's worry is unfounded, then he might think that pumping CO2 is something that should be done.

The most important thing for you to understand is that we can't pick any answer that gives us something that the author didn't say! The author didn't say this.

But to help you hate (E) a little more, let me just point out that convincing someone that their worry about X is unfounded is NOT the same thing as endorsing X.

Let's say my friend Bob is considering robbing a bank tonight, but he's worried that Santa Claus will then put Bob on the Naughty list. I can tell Bob that (spoiler alert) Santa Claus is fake, and thus his worry is unfounded. But that doesn't mean I've endorsed his plan to rob a bank!!

Hope this helps.