Courses of Action – Why poverty-fighting fails Statement: “Poverty is increasing because those deciding how to tackle it know nothing about the poor.” Decide which action(s) logically follow.
Verbal Reasoning
Course of Action
Difficulty: Medium
Choose an option
-
AOnly I follows
-
BOnly II follows
-
COnly either I or III follows
-
DAll follow
-
ENone of these
Answer
Correct Answer: Only I follows
Explanation
Introduction / Context:The statement diagnoses a knowledge gap: policy makers are out of touch with lived realities. The logical action must target that gap directly, not impose sweeping structural changes without justification.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- Cause cited: decision makers “know absolutely nothing about the poor.”
- Proposed actions: I) send decision makers to grassroots; II) decision makers should come from poorer sections; III) replace the present decision makers entirely.
Concept / Approach:We accept the premise (knowledge deficit) and pick minimally sufficient action(s) that correct it. Exposure, field immersion, participatory assessments, and data-driven feedback loops are coherent responses.
Step-by-Step Solution:
I (go to grassroots): Directly addresses the knowledge gap by experiential learning, stakeholder consultations, and evidence collection. Follows.II (must come from poorer sections): This is not logically compelled; empathy and competence do not depend solely on socioeconomic origin.III (replace decision makers): Premature. If the problem is ignorance, training and mandated field immersion can fix it; replacement is not a necessary conclusion.Verification / Alternative check:
Policy practice commonly prescribes field visits, social audits, and community engagement to bridge knowledge gaps without wholesale replacement.Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Only II / Only either I or III / All: These assert unnecessary or extreme steps beyond the diagnosed need.Common Pitfalls:
Equating origin with insight; assuming replacement is the only remedy.Final Answer:Only I follows