KAPLAN OFFICIAL EXPLANATION(B) PrincipleThe correct Principle should take into account as much of the stimulus as possible without going outside the scope.
This very cautious stimulus attempts to dissuade climbers from taking on Everest because it can put these climbers in grave danger. And it also turns out that a significant reward from such a climb—“spiritual discovery”—isn’t even likely to pan out. Climbers will discover something at the summit, the author says, but that something will be exhaustion and fear. So we need to broaden this to a general law-like rule: one should forgo dangerous recreational activities if the chances of significant spiritual reward are slim. This general rule is restated by
(B).(A) The author doesn’t say that climbers attempt Everest “primarily” for spiritual reasons. Moreover, he recommends avoidance because the spiritual reward probably won’t happen.
(C) goes way too far, venturing into the territory of what should or should not he legally prohibited. The author doesn’t discuss what ought to be illegal.
(D) We can’t use this principle to support the stimulus because the author gives no indication that profound spiritual experiences can be achieved. All the author provides in the stimulus is one instance (mountain climbing) in which such experiences probably won’t be achieved.
(E) gets too broad by discussing “other athletes” and the reasons they have for participating in their various sports. But the element of danger that’s so central to the stimulus is nowhere to be found here.