Political scientist: It is not uncommon for a politician to criticize his or her political opponents by claiming that their exposition of their ideas is muddled and incomprehensible. Such criticism, however, is never sincere. Political agendas promoted in a manner that cannot be understood by large numbers of people will not be realized for, as every politician knows, political mobilization requires commonality of purpose.
Which one of the following is the most accurate rendering of the political scientist’s main conclusion?
(A) People who promote political agendas in an incomprehensible manner
should be regarded as insincere. - WRONG. Not necessarily true. But most importantly it's an inference.
(B) Sincere critics of the proponents of a political agenda should
not focus their criticisms on the manner in which that agenda is promoted. - WRONG. It is not about the way such criticisms are made.
(C) The ineffectiveness of a confusingly promoted political agenda
is a reason for refraining from, rather than engaging in, criticism of those who are promoting it. - WRONG. Makes an inference which is wrong.
(D)
A politician criticizing his or her political opponents for presenting their political agendas in an incomprehensible manner is
being insincere. - CORRECT. ''Being insincere' equates to 'never sincere'.
(E) To mobilize large numbers of people in support of a political agenda, that political agenda
must be presented in such a way that it cannot be misunderstood - WRONG. Too good to be true was my initial thought and i fell for it. This at best can be an inference than something that equates to conclusion.
Answer D.
_________________
Pain + Reflection = Progress | Ray Dalio
Good Books to read prior to MBA