I’m happy to help. As always, let’s start with the question stem. We are looking for an answer that best resolves the apparent conflict between the statements.
To figure that out, we need to understand what the conflict between the two statements is.
The first statement says: money in any culture derives its value from scarcity, real or perceived.
The second statement says: cowrie shells were the currency in the Solomon Island economy, and those shells washed up daily on the beaches in “unlimited numbers.â€
What is the conflict? It is that in this culture, the shells that were money were unlimited, and thus it doesn’t seem like there was any scarcity.
D is the correct answer because it helps add scarcity back into the mix, resolving the conflict. It does so by making clear that even though the shells were unlimited, the shells that were accepted as money were only those that were polished and carved, and those shells required time and labor. Thus, we have reason to believe they were scarce.
I hope that helps! Please let us know if you have further questions.
