Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: ZorEliminating Paradox-Deepening Traps

During the late Bronze Age, the city-state of Olaria experienced a massive, decade-long drought that decimated its local agricultural output, which was heavily dependent on rainfall. Historical records confirm a severe shortage of domestically grown grain during this time. Yet, archaeological excavations of Olarian households from this period reveal that the average citizen consumed significantly more grain than in the agriculturally prosperous decades preceding the drought.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy?

  1. During the drought, Olaria's rulers suspended heavy tariffs on food imports, making foreign grain from distant, unaffected empires much cheaper and more abundant than locally grown grain had ever been.Cevap
  2. B
    The prolonged drought severely reduced the water levels of the major river used by merchant vessels, effectively cutting off Olaria from its traditional international trade routes.
  3. C
    The drought was completely devastating to the production of fruits and vegetables, causing the citizens to seek alternative food sources to survive.
  4. D
    While the total amount of grain consumed in Olaria increased, the proportion of the average citizen's diet consisting of grain remained the same as in previous decades.
  5. E
    Neighboring city-states located in a completely different climate zone experienced record-breaking agricultural surpluses during the exact same ten-year period.

Cevap

The statement regarding the suspension of tariffs on food imports, which made foreign grain cheaper and more abundant.
The correct answer resolves the discrepancy by introducing a new, external source of grain. Even though local production was decimated by the drought, the suspension of import tariffs made foreign grain cheaper and more abundant than local grain had ever been. This logically explains how the average citizen could afford and consume more grain despite the massive local agricultural shortage.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the apparent discrepancy in the stimulus.
Local grain production was severely shortened by a drought, but the average citizen consumed more grain than they did during prosperous times.
Understanding the two conflicting facts is the first mandatory step in finding a logical resolution.
2
Determine what is required to successfully resolve the paradox.
The correct answer must explain where the extra grain came from despite the severe local crop failure.
A valid resolution must fully account for both the increased consumption and the local agricultural collapse.
3
Evaluate the choices to find the one that reconciles both facts.
The statement about suspended tariffs introduces a new, highly affordable source of grain via imports, explaining how consumption could increase despite local crop failures.
This completely bridges the gap between local shortage and increased consumption without violating any established premises.
4
Actively eliminate paradox-deepening traps and one-sided explanations.
The choice about river trade routes being cut off is eliminated because it deepens the paradox by removing a potential source of imported grain. The choice about fruit failure is eliminated because it only explains the demand side.
An answer that makes the conflicting facts harder to reconcile is a trap, as is an answer that ignores half of the discrepancy.

Anahtar Kavram

To resolve a paradox, the correct answer must provide new information that allows both seemingly conflicting facts to coexist simultaneously without contradicting either one.
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Eliminating Paradox-Deepening Traps

Bu konudan daha fazla soru