Scholars in economics and public policy have long argued

"Economist: Scholars in economics and public policy have long argued over the best way to measure emotions such as love, anger, and jealousy in quantifiable terms that can both enhance businesses' capacity to fulfill customer needs and allow the government to implement policies that best address issues of national concern. On one side are those who believe scholars can conduct research on emotions to such an extent that it is possible to discover the financial value an individual places on such principles as health, the safety of one's children, and the worth of higher education. Sophisticated preference studies assessing a population's decisions on a very atomic level are used to conduct these investigations. On the other side are those that believe such studies, however perfected, are best only vague estimates of how emotions factor into decisions. Those who support this belief cite numerous examples of situations (an expected trend or pop culture success) in which a population's actual behavior disrupted scholars' meticulously constructed mathematical models. It remains to be seen whether mathematical models regarding decision sciences will ever reach a higher degree of accuracy. In the economist's argument, the two highlighted portions play which of the following roles?"

A. The first introduces one side of a dichotomy; the second offers a concrete example of that dichotomy.
B. The first discusses a common viewpoint about a dichotomy; the second describes premise undermining the
dichotomy itself.
C. The first describes a general topic; the second offers an example of an alternative approach to that topic.
D. The first is a common argument about a subject; the second is the author's conclusion.
E. The first identifies one side of a dichotomy; the second indicates how one side supports its argument.