Sumit sir clearly taught us that some of the key words are for enhancing the line,, here always is that word which is not mention in the paragraph but in option it was , so it should not be the answer , how can it be??

Sumit sir clearly taught us that some of the key words are for enhancing the line,, here always is that word which is not mention in the paragraph but in option it was , so it should not be the answer , how can it be??

other options ,,C can be alternativeScreenshot (882).png 564.26 KB

other options ,,C can be alternativeScreenshot (882).png 564.26 KB

Hi Kunal, to solve this question, let's analyze the main paragraph and compare it with the given summaries:The paragraph essentially states that:Free trade has both benefits and downsides.It increases overall material wellbeing ("size of the pie").Not everyone benefits equally; some may be worse off.The government can potentially compensate the "losers" due to the overall increase in wealth.Now, let's evaluate each summary option:"While there are many supporters of free trade, it is known to benefit only those who get their fair share from the increased pie size." This is incorrect as it contradicts the paragraph's point that some people might be worse off."At the end, Free trade makes everyone better off." This is too absolute and doesn't capture the nuance in the paragraph about some people potentially being worse off."Free trade increases the overall size of the pie but not everyone's share is equal which could be a downside." This captures two key points from the paragraph but misses the potential for government compensation."Free trade is known to enhance the overall size of the pie and while not all may benefit equally, the government can always redistribute the affected with the extra total." This option captures all the main points of the paragraph: increased overall wealth, unequal benefits, and the potential for government redistribution.Therefore, the best summary that captures the author's position is the last option: "Free trade is known to enhance the overall size of the pie and while not all may benefit equally, the government can always redistribute the affected with the extra total."You're absolutely correct that we need to be cautious about absolute terms like "always" when they appear in answer choices but not in the original text. This is generally a good rule of thumb in reading comprehension and summary questions. However, the other options have more significant issues: Option 1 contradicts the passage by saying only some benefit.Option 2 is too absolute in saying everyone is better off.Option 3 misses the key point about government redistribution.Despite the inclusion of "always," the last option still captures the essence of the paragraph most accurately, including the crucial point about potential government redistribution.In an ideal scenario, the best answer would not include "always." However, in multiple-choice questions, we often have to select the option that is closest to the correct answer, even if it's not perfect.This situation highlights an important lesson: while general rules (like being wary of absolute terms) are very helpful, we sometimes need to weigh different factors and choose the best available option, even if it's not flawless.

But still option 3 is not correct whole but partially correct though, cause it doesn't have any flaws, but last option directly claims that government always give..... well ok :)

But still option 3 is not correct whole but partially correct though, cause it doesn't have any flaws, but last option directly claims that government always give..... well ok :)

about parasummary Screenshot (881).png 565.45 KB

about parasummary Screenshot (881).png 565.45 KB