gwd-2-21

wstartww

(1 this is the goal in the argument) Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the Wilgrinn Wilderness Area from residential development. 

(2 this is the plan for the goal, call strategy) They plan to do this by purchasing that land from the farmers who own it. 

(3 this the evaluation of the plan, NOTE, the goal is not ill-conceived, instead )That plan is ill-conceived: 

(4 Reason#1 for the ill-conceive plan)  if the farmers did sell their land, they would sell it to the highest bidder, and developers would outbid any other bidders. 

(5 Reason #2 for the ill-conceived plan, it also a middle conclusion) On the other hand, these farmers will never actually sell any of the land, provided that farming it remains viable. 

(6 basis for the conclusion(reason#2) But farming will not remain viable if the farms are left unmodernized, and most of the farmers lack the financial resources modernization requires. 

(7 basis leads to the new "strategy" because reason#2 may not be ture. In order to make reason #2 true, the argument brings in a new advocacy of a particular strategy.)  And that is exactly why a more sensible preservation strategy would be to assist the farmers to modernize their farms to the extent needed to maintain viability.

This is why I think D is the best choice.  I wrote a Chinese version. I lost the old copy, no energy to type in all Chinese again.  Sorry.

xxafra

最终的目的是preserve land?

如果assist modernize的话，农民的maintain viability得需求就增加，就preserve了？

望指教。。。

kuizee

mindfree is NN!

He explained all the choices in one sentence.