Verbal Ability - Comprehension - Discussion

Modern economies does not differentiate between renewable and non-renewable materials, as its method is to measures everything by means of a money price. Thus, taking various alternatives fuels, like coal, oil, wood or water power: the only difference between them recognised by modern economics is relative cost per equivalent unit. The cheapest is automatically the one to be preferred, as to do otherwise would be irrational and 'uneconomic'. From a Buddhist point of view of course this will not do, the essential difference between non-renewable fuels like coal and oil on the one hand and renewable fuels like wood and water power on the other cannot be simply overlooked. Non-renewable goods must be used only if they are indespensible, and then only with the greatest care and the highest concern for conservation. To use them carelessly or extravagantly is an act of violence, and while complete non-violence may not be possible on earth, it is nonetheless the duty of man to aim at deal of non-violence in all he does.

3. 

In this passage the author is trying to

[A]. differentiate between renewable and non-renewable materials
[B]. show that the modern economist is only concerned with costs
[C]. underline the need for conserving natural resources
[D]. different between two economic philosophies

Answer: Option D

Explanation:

No answer description available for this question.

Shreyask said: (Aug 18, 2015)  
Buddhist point of view is not an economic philosophy. How can the author then be trying to differentiate between two economic philosophies?

Kunal said: (Sep 27, 2015)  
Does anyone else think the answer should be [B]?

Sushovan said: (Jul 18, 2016)  
I think the answer should be (B).

Rohan said: (Aug 7, 2016)  
I also think it should be (B).

Dhananjay said: (Jul 31, 2019)  
The answer should be B.

Post your comments here:

Name *:

Email   : (optional)

» Your comments will be displayed only after manual approval.