The Science Academy study explains that it has demonstrated that SOME well-managed farms are able to reduce the amounts of synthetic fertilizer while not decreasing yields, and--in fact--while possibly increasing yields.
The critic responds by saying that this isn't true because the farms that the Academy selected were only those that seemed like they could be successful with natural methods. They did not look at those farms that have tried the natural methods and failed.
So, ultimately, the Academy's point is that using natural methods while not sacrificing yield is possible for some farms, while the critic states that this is not so since this study was not representative of all types of farms.
We are asked to choose the answer choice that best evaluates the critic's response.
Your first thought to the critic should be, so what? Who cares if the study wasn't representative if all that the Academy is concluding is that SOME farms are able to use natural methods and not sacrifice their yield?
Remember that "some" can mean just one. So, all the Academy is saying is that at least one farm was able to do this. Thus, it doesn't matter whether their study was representative of all farms, since the study did show that at least one farm was able.
Answer choice (E) illustrates this: "The issue is only to show that something is possible, so it is not relevant whether the instances studied were representative."
Hope that was helpful! Please let us know if you have any other questions.
doglvrAugust 19, 2015
I don't understand how the answer evaluates the critics response. It seems more like it evaluates the academy's response
halleraeApril 13, 2018
I agree with Mansi, still confused by this response.. Can you elaborate?
hbrennan14@gmail.comSeptember 20, 2018
Hello. Can you please explain? Melody's reasoning seems to be evaluating the academy's response. Which is NOT what the question is asking. If you look below, there are two people who have the same observation as myself. Can we please get a better explanation????
MehranSeptember 20, 2018
@doglvr @hallerae @hbrennan14@gmail.com you are correct hat the question here is asking us to find the answer choice that is "the most adequate evaluation of the logical force of the critics' response" to the Science Academy study but this doesn't change the fact that (E) is still the correct answer.
Let's write out this exchange in simpler terms:
Science Academy study: X is possible as demonstrated by Y.
Critics: X is not possible because Y was not representative. What about Z who have tried X and failed?
So you notice that (E) is actually evaluating the Critics' response because that fact that Y is not representative is completely irrelevant to whether X is possible.
"The issue is only to show that something is possible [the Science Academy study which showed X is possible], so it is not relevant whether the instances studied were representative [the Critics' response that Y is not representative]."
Do you see how (E) is saying that the Critics' response is not relevant?
