In any negotiations between a party with limited aims and an opposing party with unlimited aims, the party with limited aims is bound to lose. This is so because the scope of a negotiating party's aims determines the energy and the perseverance that will be brought to the negotiations by that party.
Party with limited aims vs Party with unlimited aims.
Party with limited aims = Loose
Because, scope of aims determines the energy and perseverance.
Which of the following is an assumption implicit in the passage above?
(A) The intensity with which parties conduct negotiations affects the outcome of those negotiations.Right. Scope determines the energy because of which party with limited sim will lose.
(B) Negotiations almost always pit against one another parties whose aims differ in scope.Wrong. Negotiation are always pit against one another parties whose views differ.
(C) The outcome of negotiations cannot be correctly predicted in advance.Wrong. True. But how is this helping the conclusion?
(D) A negotiator who has exceptionally high aims needs exceptional perseverance in order to avoid losing.Wrong. Unlimited aims brings high perseverance not high aims.
(E) Negotiating parties are typically not aware of the scope of each other's aims until the outcome is no longer in doubt.Wrong. If they are not aware of each other's aim then how will they countereact to each other points.