question_answer

Direction: Read the given passage carefully and answer the questions that follow. Modern economics does not differentiate between renewable and non renewable materials, as its method is to measure everything by means of a money price. Thus, taking various alternative fuels, like coal, oil, wood or water power: the only difference between them recognized 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 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 indispensable, 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 this earth, it is none the less the duty of man to aim at the ideal of non violence in all he does.

Fill in the blanks with appropriate pair of phrases. The passage suggests that while a modern economist   considers   it   uneconomic   to use _______ form of fuel, a Buddhist economist considers it uneconomic to use ______ form of fuel.

 

A) a rational, an unessential

B) an expensive, an un-renewable

C) an irrational, an essential

D) a cheap, a renewable

E) None of these