Modern economies does not differentiate between renewable and non-renewable materials, as its
method is to measures everything by means of a money price. Thus, taking various alternatives
fuels, like coal, oil, wood or water power: the only difference between them recognised 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
the 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 indespensible, 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 earth, it is
nonetheless the duty of man to aim at deal of non-violence in all he does.
37871.Which of the following statements may be assumed to be false from the information in the passage? a. The writer finds the attitude of modern economists towards natural resources to be uneconomic. b. Buddhist economists are in different to the cost of fuels c. To use oil on non-essentials is contrary to the Buddhist economic philosophy d. To fell a tree is an act of violence not permitted by Buddhist economists Of the above statements
1 and 2 are false
1, 2 and 4 are false
3 and 4 are false
All 1, 2, 3, and 4 are false
37872.According to the passage, Buddhist economists are not in favour of
differentiate between renewable and non-renewable materials
show that the modern economist is only concerned with costs
underline the need for conserving natural resources
different between two economic philosophies
37874.Fill in the blanks with the 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 a fuel
a cheap, a renewable
an irrational, an essential
an expensive, an non-renewable
a rational, an unessential
37875.The Buddhist economists attitude implies that fuels like coal and oil must be used only if
there is a plentiful supply
wood and water can be dispensed with
the relative cost of each is than of wood and water
there is no alternative fuel available
Sometimes we went off the road and on a path through the pine forest. The floor of the forest was
soft to walk on; the frost did not happen it as it did the road. But we did not mind the hardness of
the road because we had nails in the soles and heels nails bit on the frozen ruts and with nailed
boots it was good walking on the road and invigorating. It was lovely walking in the woods.
