akanshaxo wrote:
Peraski: Although driving gas-guzzling automobiles produces a greater level of pollution than driving smaller cars, those of us who drive smaller cars when we could use a bicycle cannot speak out against the use of gas guzzlers. We would be revealing our hypocrisy.
Jackson: I acknowledge I could do better in this area. But, it would be worse not to speak out against greater sources of pollution just because I am being hypocritical.
The dialogue provides the most support for the claim that Peraski and Jackson disagree over whether
Jackson: I acknowledge I could do better in this area. But, it would be worse not to speak out against greater sources of pollution just because I am being hypocritical.
The dialogue provides the most support for the claim that Peraski and Jackson disagree over whether
D is the correct answer.
Peraski said : We can also use bicycle instead of car. So when we are not doing our bit to reduce the pollution, then how can we point out someone else for using gas-guzzling automobiles.
Jackson said : Jackson accepted that he can do his bit to reduce pollution, but he feels it would be worse if he purposely don't speak against pollution just because he is not contributing himself and even if people call him hypocrite.
Answer choice D hits the chord direct.
(A) driving a gas-guzzling automobile produces a greater level of pollution than driving a smaller car
(B) speaking out against the use of gas guzzlers despite driving in situations in which one could use a bicycle reveals hypocrisy
(C) driving even a small car when one could use a bicycle contributes to the level of pollution
(D) one should speak out against polluting even if doing so reveals one's own hypocrisy
(E) there is no moral difference between driving a gas guzzler and driving a smaller car