It is often said that people should be rewarded for doing a given job in proportion to the effort it costs them to do it. However, a little reflection will show that this is, in fact, a very bad idea, since it would mean that those people with the least skill or natural aptitude for a particular task would be the ones given the most incentive to do it.
Which one of the following argumentative strategies is used above?
(A) stating a general principle and then presenting reasons in favor of adopting it
(B) providing evidence that where the principle under discussion has been adopted, the results usually have been undesirable
(C) demonstrating that a consequence that had been assumed to follow from the principle under consideration need not follow from it
(D) attempting to undermine a general principle by arguing that undesirable consequences would follow from it
(E) showing that, in practice, the principle under consideration could not be uniformly applied
"A" states opposite to the passage.
In "B" we are talking about Evidence but no sort of proper evidence is given in passage since author is assuming so B is OUT.
"C" talks about outcome not derived from principle under discussion but doesnt talk about the undesireable consequence that will crop up.
"E" talks about applying uniformly, taking it vague. The word "Often" used in first sentence will make the principle considered as a General Principle and later we see that undesireable consequence of wrong acknowledgement can be realized. Making an attempt to realize that undesireable consequences might follow...So "D" is the right answer...
Pls correct me if u think I am wrong!