Arro44 wrote:
We are looking for a general reason that follows the logic of the statement.
As per the answer choice statistics, most people were able to narrow it down to the choices D and E.
In this case, D seems appealing because it seems to follow the rationale of the given argument and even recycles some of the language (e.g. "good for the economy").
However, when we have a closer look at both D and E we notice that it is actually the statement in AC E that follows the rationale of the OS.
We are not abandoning a tradition merely for the sake of the economy, but we evaluate a tradition based on its original intention.
Hope this helps.
Regards,
Chris
Thanks Chris,
I got choose D and of course, got it wrong.
From your explanation, I connect the dots (for others), this way:Premise : Proposals for extending the United States school year to bring it more in line with its European and Japanese counterparts are often met with the
objection that curtailing the schools’ three-month summer vacation
would violate an established United States tradition dating from the nineteenth century.
Conclusion: However, this objection misses its mark.
Premise :True, in the nineteenth century the majority of schools closed for three months every summer, but only because they were in rural areas where successful harvests depended on children’s labor.
[color=#ed1c24]premise: reason behind Conclusion:[/color]If
any policy could be
justified by those appeals to tradition, it would be the policy of determining the length of the school year
according to the needs of the economy.
In other words the argument is: The reasoning that 'If one has to NOT to violate tradition, one should NOT violate (should follow) the rationale/thought process/intent behind that tradition'
is faulty.Which one of the following principles, if accepted, would provide the strongest justification for the conclusion?
(A) That a given social policy has traditionally been in force justifies maintaining that policy only if doing so does not conflict with more pressing social needs.
<== Irrelevant to conclusion. Eliminate this option(B) Appeals to its own traditions cannot excuse a country from the obligation to bring its practices in line with the legitimate expectations of the rest of the world.
<== Irrelevant to conclusion. Eliminate this option(C) Because appeals to tradition often serve to mask the real interests at issue, such appeals should be disregarded.
<== Conclusion doesn't say, tradition masks actual reasoning or real interest,. Eliminate this option(D) Traditional principles should be discarded when they no longer serve the needs of the economy.
<== This looks close to conclusion, however argument talks about relevance of intent and the needs of economy. children’s labor, if allowed, may still can contribute in successful harvest. Eliminate this option(E) The actual tradition embodied in a given practice can be accurately identified only by reference to the reasons that originally prompted that practice.
==> Since we are left with only one option. This should be the answer. Moreover, one last validation - yes, this is conclusion restated.
_________________
The Graceful
----------------------------------------------------------
Every EXPERT was a beginner once...
Don't look at the clock. Do what it does, keep going..
To achieve great things, two things are needed:a plan and not quite enough time - Leonard Bernstein.