230

( E) : Opposit e. As above.

3) Review t he part s of your m ap t hat t ouch on t he benefit s of st udying Aust ralian ecosyst em s; elim inat e answer choices t hat m at ch up while looking for som et hing t hat falls out side t he scope of t he passage. ( C) is never m ent ioned, and it would be difficult t o im agine how st udying ecosyst em s could provide insight int o hydroelect ric or solar power anyway . ( A) : Opposit e. This is m ent ioned in 2. ( B) : Opposit e. This is m ent ioned in 5. (C): The correct answer ( D) : Opposit e. This is m ent ioned in 3. ( E) : Opposit e. This is m ent ioned in 2.

4) This is primarily a descriptive passage and C summarises this really well. ( A) : The aut hor m ak es no such claim (B): The author is not criticising anyone in the passage (C): The correct answer ( D) : Too specific t o be t he answer. While t he aut hor does st at e t his, it is not t he m ain purpose of t he passage ( E) : Ext r em e opt ion, plus t oo specific t o be t he m ain purpose

www.aristotleprep.com

231

PASSAGE 9
Topic and Scope - The aut hor discusses t he t hreat posed by dioxin and suggest s t hat fears about t he t oxin m ay be ov erblown. Mapping the Passage 1 provides an exam ple of anot her case of hyst eria ov er a t oxin t hat out ran scient ific knowledge. 2 st at es t hat som e claim t hat dioxin is a t hreat and t hat t he react ion t o dioxin m ay also be ov erly em ot ional. 3 rhet orically asks if t here can be any m eaningful response. 4 describes responses t o t he dioxin t hreat , expr esses skept icism at som e envi ronmentalists proposals, and suggests that common sense and risk analysis should guide decisions about t hreat s. 5 quot es an aut horit y t o argue t hat levels of risk should be kept in perspect ive.

1) Predict by recalling the authors main points: fears about cert ain t oxins are oft en ov erblown and should be t em pered by com m on sense and science. ( D) sim ply repeat s t his. ( A) : Out of Scope. Theres no evidence from the passage that the government has ignored t hese problem s. The aut hor m ight also disput e t he seriousness of t hese health problems, as its argued in 4 that asbestos fears are exaggerated. ( B) : Opposit e. The aut hor argues roughl y the opposite: dioxin isnt the threat many m ake it out t o be. ( C) : Out of Scope. While this might be true, theres no evidence from the passage t hat t he gov ernm ent m odifies ext r em e environm ent al st ances. (D): The correct answer ( E) : Opposit e: The aut hor will probably consider t his a very ext r em e st ep

2) Look for an answ er choice t hat eit her cont radict s som et hing t hat t he aut hor say s about reactions or simply isnt included in the passage. (C) fits the latter: the aut hor never m ent ions t he effect of drast ic react ions on insurance pr em ium s. ( A) : Opposit e. This is the point made in the last paragraph: its more effective to worry about safet y m et hods t hat have been prov en t o im prove safet y. ( B) : Opposit e. This can be inferred from various st at em ent s in t he passage: t he aut hor believes t hat drast ic react ions generally represent irrat ional t hought t hat can it self be dangerous if it leads t o t he neglect of prov en safet y m easures.

www.aristotleprep.com