sondenso wrote:
carlson2010 wrote:
I say E.
Drug companies=We need quotas, etc., because our research costs are too high and we cannot make the money needed to cover our investments if there are cheap drugs coming in from Canada.
Old people=We need cheap drugs because drugs are too expensive now.
In other words, both are complaining about the high cost of research. The paradox lies in the fact that the two groups suggest opposite solutions for the same problem.
If the old people were also arguing for a government grant to help pay for research, this would solve the paradox by allowing the two groups to agree on one solution for the same problem. The drug companies could cover their investments and the old people could get their cheap drugs.
Carlson,
I like your reasoning! And I think you must have some useful tips for this kind of question! May you share it? Admittedly, I am weak at paradox question!
This question wasn't the best example of a paradox. A paradox is usually something that is self-contradictory. In this problem the "paradox" was simply that two groups had opposite solutions for the same problem. I wouldn't really even call this situation a "paradox", its more like a disagreement.
Anyway, to answer your question, whenever I see a "paradox" question, I try to simplify it as much as possible to clearly see where the contradiction is. After that the answer that solves the contradiction just kind of jumps out. In this problem, there wasn't really a self contradiction, so I went with the answer that would align the two parties wishes, solving the "paradox" (if you want to call it that).
I don't know if this explanation helps much, but that's how I do it. Hope it helps.
Anyway, what is the OA? Am I even right?