by ohthatpatrick Fri Apr 12, 2019 2:59 am
Hey, Madison. Thanks for requesting a complete explanation.
QUESTION TYPE: Detail-(Identification)
PREPHRASE:
No way to make a prediction here, so we just remind ourselves, "Look out for overly strong/specific wording, unknown comparisons, or out of scope ideas."
ANSWERS
(A) too strong --- "the only way"?
(B) too strong --- "fails"? Also, inaccurate to say that its models lack rigor. According to the passage, decreasing returns was always described rigorously with elegant formalism. And then by the late 70's Pin Factory also got described more rigorously.
(C) weak claim: to support this, we just need to point to a different reason why Pin Factory failed to gain prominence. It was says in lines 38-40, its not about ideology, it's about taking the path of least resistance, mathematically.
(D) too strong --- "no one" is in a position to have a monopoly? Also, opposite! The Pin Factory model (increasing returns) would trend towards monopolies.
(E) too strong --- he didn't recognize "ANY" tension? We don't know this, and it's extremely plausible Adam Smith could have recognized at least some tension between the two models.
Hope this helps.