pkum036 wrote:
Q.
Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce crop plants that are highly resistant to insect damage. Unfortunately, the seeds themselves are quite expensive, and the plants require more fertilizer and water to grow well than normal ones. Thus, for most farmers the savings on pesticides would not compensate for the higher seed costs and the cost of additional fertilizer. However, since consumer demand for grains, fruits, and vegetables grown without the use of pesticides continues to rise, the use of genetically engineered seeds of this kind is likely to become widespread.
For this question, the main conclusion is "the use of genetically engineered seeds of this kind is likely to become widespread. "
However, why cant "Thus, for most farmers the savings on pesticides would not compensate for the higher seed costs and the cost of additional fertilize" be the main conclusion? The reasoning could be - "Because the use of genetically modified seeds is likely to become widespread, therefore most farmers will not be able to be compensated due to ....".
Have i missed the point? Please clarify
thanks
Yes, you are kind of missing the point
. Remember to stick to the facts of the argument and don't try to construct an argument that you find more logically appealing or that makes more sense to you. Here is a nice trick for you to use when you have two possible conclusions ... I'll call it the "therefore test". The conclusion will be the main point of the argument or the last stop in the logical chain - the piece that makes sense after the "therefore". See below:
Here are your conclusion options:
1) Savings on pesticides would not compensate for the higher seed costs and the cost of additional fertilizer
2) The use of genetically engineered seeds of this kind is likely to become widespread
The structure of the argument says:
+The genetic seeds are more expensive and require more fertilizer/water
+Demand for non-pesticide food continues to rise
Therefore
1) Savings on pesticides would not compensate for the higher seed costs and the cost of additional fertilizer
or
2) The use of genetically engineered seeds of this kind is likely to become widespread
The premises clearly lead us to the last logical point (2) that in spite of the increased cost, the demand for this food will cause the seeds to become widespread. NOTE: This clearly has some assumptions that are made in the process (i.e. the demand will increase the chargeable price of the food to overcome the increased costs).
KW