Key Takeaway confusion

Yes you are correct the conclusion is that calling any state totalitarian is misleading. It is still the end point, just the endpoint of the argument. A nice way to see this is to add the word "Thus," before what you think the conclusion is and then move said conclusion to the end and see if it makes sense. In this case it would work perfectly: "This is because any system of control is inefficient, and, therefore, its degree of control is partial. Thus, to call any state totalitarian is misleading."

I am a little confused question 19. I presumed that the first sentence would be the premise, because she is using words like "misleading." Wouldn't that be her premise? I thought the last sentence was the conclusion because it uses "therefore" and implies that totalitarianism and any other systems of control is partial.

Hi Nicholastillar, You're right that the therefore introduces a conclusion, however in this case it is an intermediate conclusion. The final sentence is being used to prove the first sentence- since the degree of control must be partial, it is therefore misleading to call a state totalitarian.

Why is the answer not D?

Hi Isahia, D (the idea that no state has control over even one thing) actually supports the conclusion. We can use a "therefore" test here. It makes sense if we say that "no state has control over even one thing therefore no state can be called totalitarian correctly." So, the first statement supports the second. The point of Maria's argument is that it is not correct to call any state totalitarian.