Question

questions 1 through 9 refer to the following. (the following passage is excerpted from a speech delivered by a united states statesman in 1930.) warned by the disaster of the last great war, 1 the statesmen of all nations have been taking measures to prevent the return of another such calamity. these measures may not constitute an absolute guarantee of peace, but, in my opinion, they constitute the greatest preventive measures ever adopted by nations. it is not to be expected that human nature will change in a day; perhaps it is too much to expect that the age - old institution of war, which has darkened the centuries, been recognized by international law as a sovereign right and has been adopted by nations, will be at once abolished, but people of all nations should be encouraged by the great progress which has been made since the war in the furtherance of international peace. i cannot in this brief address discuss these measures beyond enumerating them. there is the league of nations, 2 which has been functioning for ten years and which, i am sure, has been most beneficial in adjusting many difficult international problems; the pact of paris, 3 arbitration treaties; conciliation treaties; and the court of international justice, 4 and i might add that commendable progress has been made toward reduction of armament. each of these treaties is a step for the maintenance of peace, an additional guarantee against war. it is through such machinery that the disputes between nations will be settled and war prevented. it is not my intention today to discuss the pact of paris, which has passed into history; perhaps i should not say it has passed into history, but has been cemented in the foundations of the nations organic law, as a solemn pledge not to go to war for the settlement of their disputes - a pledge which was entered into voluntarily and backed by the united sentiment of the people of the world and one which i am convinced the nations intend to carry out in absolute good faith. it was inspired by the determination of peoples not to be again afflicted with the horrors of such an appalling catastrophe. it was inspired by the memory of devastated lands, ruined homes, and the millions of men and women sacrificed in that awful struggle. it was not an ordinary treaty entered into by nations to serve some temporary advantage, like treaties of amity or alliances; it was a sacred promise between all nations and to all peoples of the world not to go to war for the settlement of their differences, to use a common phrase, to outlaw war, to make it a crime against the law of nations which violate it should be condemned by the public opinion of the world. i know there are those who believe that peace will not be attained until some super - tribunals is 1. which of the following best describes how the author organizes the reasoning of his argument in the opening lines of the passage (warned by the disaster... ever adopted by nations)? a. arguing from specific cases to a general conclusion b. tracing a sequence of events resulting in a positive outcome c. pointing out the differences among various opinions d. drawing parallels between the current situation and a past crisis

Explanation:

The author starts by warning about past disasters and measures adopted by nations, then moves to general statements about the need for peace - like outlawing war and using treaties for arbitration. This is arguing from specific cases (past disasters and measures) to a general conclusion about peace - related actions.

Answer:

A. Arguing from specific cases to a general conclusion