Q5

[Shiggins]

I was stuck between choice A & E and chose E bc I believed A is represents the ideas of the group lobbying for the change.

I know that group was against Article 1 and wanted the member states to take separate and joint action. How does this relate to the UDHR. If anyone could explain.

[noah]

Here we're asked to identify the author's opinion.

(A) is tempting, since there were some groups who felt that the language needs to be strengthened. However, we learn the author's opinion later, when talking about the UDHR. We're not actually sure what the author thinks about Article 1 of the UN charter, since all we get is a recounting of how others felt. Furthermore, and perhaps more importantly, even if we somehow could place the author as a member of the group that railed against that Article's weakness, that group didn't object to the ambiguous language but the article's lack of teeth (requirement that member states act).

(B) is unsupported. From the last paragraph we do learn that the author sees the Declaration as weak - but we don't learn that those weaknesses outweigh the strengths that the author mentions.

(C) is contradicted by the third paragraph.

(D) is unsupported. The author seems to feel that something is missing, but not more rights.

(E) is supported by lines 11-23 where we learn that some groups objected to the UN Declaration because it was not legally binding countries to protect human rights. Later, in lines 45-49, we learn that the UDHR also was not binding. So, we can infer that those groups would be unhappy with this issue, since it's the same one, but showing up in a different document.

That clear it up?

[shirando21]

I do not agree with the reason you gave to eliminate A.

the answer choice A talks about the language in UN Charter.

Line 48, all its strong language, is for UDHR. they are two different documents. so I do not think the reason you gave for eliminating A applies here.

[noah]

I do not agree with the reason you gave to eliminate A.

the answer choice A talks about the language in UN Charter.

Line 48, all its strong language, is for UDHR. they are two different documents. so I do not think the reason you gave for eliminating A applies here.

Hey, great to see someone reading so closely! Thanks, I'll go and edit that right now. For those that are interested in seeing exactly how I screwed up, here's what it used to say:

(A) is tempting, since there were some groups who felt that the language needs to be strengthened. However, we learn the author's opinion later. In the third paragraph the author mentions "all its strong language" and so we can consider (A) to be contradicted.

[shirando21]

basic skills when apply statute sections to a situation

But reading is really hard...

[schmid215]

I definitely would have picked (E) if I hadn't reversed strengths and weaknesses in reading (B), but I do not see how anything in the second paragraph supports (E). We have no evidence that the critics of the UN Charter (and that's what we're talking about in P2, not the UDHR as in P3) were the "staunchest proponents" of the UDHR. Sure, it seems plausible, but that's a leap. I suppose (E) is definitely still the best of the bunch though.

Also, Noah, do you agree that if strengths and weaknesses were switched in choice (B) that it would be a better answer choice than choice (E)? Or at least a good correct answer choice in the absence of (E)?

[noah]

I definitely would have picked (E) if I hadn't reversed strengths and weaknesses in reading (B), but I do not see how anything in the second paragraph supports (E). We have no evidence that the critics of the UN Charter (and that's what we're talking about in P2, not the UDHR as in P3) were the "staunchest proponents" of the UDHR. Sure, it seems plausible, but that's a leap. I suppose (E) is definitely still the best of the bunch though.

Also, Noah, do you agree that if strengths and weaknesses were switched in choice (B) that it would be a better answer choice than choice (E)? Or at least a good correct answer choice in the absence of (E)?

Thanks for the question.

P2 is about the process of passing the UDHR, not specifically about the critics of the UN Charter. I think the last sentence of P1 supports the idea that the proposals of the critics of Article 1 of the UN charter were used to draft the UDHR.

As for your modified (B), it still would seem like a weak answer to me, as the author's opinion of the UDHR, in the passage's final two sentences, is rather reserved. Even that last sentence, which notes the creation of legally-binding human rights, has the "belatedly" caveat.

[JinZ551]

can I eliminate A because the word "wholly ineffectual" being too strong?