#19 - It is widely known that the rescue squads serving high

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Resolve. The correct answer choice is (E).

Answer choice (A):

Answer choice (B):

Answer choice (C):

Answer choice (D):

Answer choice (E): This is the correct answer choice.

This explanation is still in progress. Please post any questions below!

[lina2020]

Hi PowerScore,

Would you please explain your thought process on this question, specifically why E is right and why the other answer choice were eliminated?

I'm having trouble understanding how answer choice E would tie into the claim that the rescue squads should be abolished. If they are abolished, I would imagine that would lower the perception of risk and thereby increase the number of less competent climbers and thereby increase the risk of deaths and injuries. It almost seems like an opposite answer to me rather than resolving the paradox.

[Adam Tyson]

We will post a more complete explanation soon, Lina, but the short answer for now is this: because it is "widely known" that the squads save many lives, their presence gives the perception that climbing is safe (if I get in trouble, no problem, the rescue squad will save me!) It is the presence of the squads that may actually be encouraging climbers to take risks that they are not experienced enough to handle! Abolishing the squads will not give the impression that the risk is lower, but rather that it is higher (if I get in trouble I am on my own), and if that's true it would explain why the experienced climbers think it would be better to abolish them than to keep them around.

A curious paradox, and an interesting twist on the "surprisingly bad result" scenario that we see so frequently in this type of question. The squads should be making things safer, but in fact the experts think they are making it worse! We see that all the time in questions about strong safety requirements coupled with poor safety records, or someone who is supposed to be very good at their job getting terrible results, or a medical treatment that should be making things better but the patients are doing worse than patients not getting the treatment, etc. In most of those cases the resolution is some form of "if not for this good thing the results would be even worse. In this case, though, the thing that should be making things better actually IS making it worse, at least according to some people. Sort of like widening the road to make it safer, and then drivers feel so safe that they drive more recklessly as a result. Unintended consequences!

[theamazingrace]

I see that E is right because with the rescue squads less competent climbers got a false sense of perceived safety/security and without the resue squad their preceded risk increases but when doing the test I thought D encompassed that too. Since most people were not prepared that was okay since the resue squad would save them and then if the resue squad was to no longer there they would have to always be ready and prepared because they have no one to rely on.

[Adam Tyson]

I think you're bringing in too much outside info in your analysis of answer D, theamazingrace. If the people who died were mostly ill-prepared, why would getting rid of rescue squads actually reduce deaths? We cannot assume that these poorly prepared climbers would think twice, because the answer neither says that nor implies it. We could just as easily say that more people would die if their were no rescue squads because those climbers who were not properly prepared would have no safety net. Answer D leaves us wondering what would happen - would things get better, or worse, or stay the same?

Answer E is more active, and without us making any assumptions of our own it gives us a reason to accept the position of the experienced climbers. Change the perception of safety and that will change who chooses to take on the risk.

[toddburtron@gmail.com]

I selected C as my first choice but certainly now see why E is the correct answer. However, C & E seem very much akin to one another. Would you please help me discern the differences?

[kupwarriors9]

I choose E in my PT, then upon blind review I went with B. I know why E is right but please tell me why B is incorrect

[Robert Carroll]

todd,

Answer choice (C) seems to give a reason why experienced climbers would not expect rescue squads to help them, but that doesn't explain why they believe the squads are actually causing more problems than they fix.

kup,

Answer choice (B) would seem to indicate that experienced climbers only think that rescue squads are harmful, because areas with such squads have better records. Better records, though, could mean a larger or smaller number of deaths (compared to areas with poor records which deflate or inflate the death count); why would experienced climbers think squads are dangerous if the records are more accurate? It provides no explanation.

Robert Carroll