2021 CSAT — Q24

Locate. This is a valid-assumption question — find the unstated premise the argument needs, and watch the passage’s qualifier strength (negate a candidate: if the argument breaks, it was needed). The passage: GDP growth is the “importance” at the centre of development economics; “in theory, rising GDP creates employment and investment opportunities”; as incomes grow, households/communities/governments “are increasingly able to set aside some funds”; and GDP has become the meaning of “economic growth.” Note the hedges: “in theory,” “increasingly able,” “some funds.”

Test (negation + qualifier-match).

• St1 — “rising GDP is essential for a country to be developed.” The passage calls GDP important and central, but never a necessary condition for development. “Essential” is a strength the text does not reach. INVALID — too strong for what the passage says.
• St2 — “rising GDP guarantees a reasonable distribution to all households.” The passage says households are “increasingly able to set aside some funds” — a hedged ability, not a guaranteed, universal, equitable distribution. INVALID — it changes the passage’s level of certainty.

Eliminate by anatomy. (a)/(c) seat St1 — too strong for what the passage says: “important/central” upgraded to “essential/necessary.” (b)/(c) seat St2 — changing the passage’s level of certainty: “increasingly able to set aside some” upgraded to “guarantees… to all.” Both statements over-strengthen a hedged passage; neither survives. Key: (d).

Statement 1 fires the QUALIFIER boundary: the passage says GDP growth is “important” and central to the development lexicon, but never that it is essential/necessary to becoming a developed country — “is essential for a country to be a developed country” hardens importance into a necessary condition → INVALID. Statement 2 fires the QUALIFIER boundary too: the passage says “households, communities, and governments are increasingly able to set aside some funds” — an ability, not a guarantee, and certainly not “a reasonable distribution to all households.” “Guarantees… to all” inflates a hedged “increasingly able to” → INVALID. → (d).

The passage stresses GDP’s central place in development economics in carefully hedged terms — “in theory,” “increasingly able,” “some funds.”

• St1 turns “important/central” into “essential for being a developed country,” a necessary-condition claim the passage never makes. Invalid.
• St2 turns “increasingly able to set aside some funds” into “guarantees a reasonable distribution to all households,” inflating both the certainty and the universality. Invalid.

Answer: (d) Neither 1 nor 2.

This item is a pure qualifier test. The passage is studded with hedges — “in theory,” “increasingly able,” “some funds” — and both statements quietly strip them away: “essential,” “guarantees,” “all.” A preserved hedge is the signature of a valid statement; an option that promotes a passage’s “may/able to/ some” into “essential/guarantees/all” has failed the certainty check. Read the modal words, not the nouns: the nouns (GDP, development, households) all match the passage, but the strengths do not.