Read the following excerpt from levitt and dubner’s freakonomics. as it happens, feldman’s accidental study provides a window onto a form of cheating that has long stymied academics: white-collar crime. (yes, shorting the bagel man is white-collar crime, writ however small.) it might seem ludicrous to address as large and intractable a problem as white-collar crime through the life of a bagel man. but often a small and simple question can chisel away at the biggest problems. despite all the attention paid to rogue companies like enron, academics know very little about the practicalities of white-collar crime. the reason? there are no good data. a key fact of white-collar crime is that we hear about only the very slim fraction of people who are caught cheating. most embezzlers lead quiet and theoretically happy lives; employees who steal company property are rarely detected. what purpose does the “bagel man” serve in this argument? a. to shift the focus toward a specific man b. to entertain the reader with a funny story c. to show the seriousness of cheating d. to shed light on white-collar crime the correct answer is to show the seriousness of cheating

In this excerpt, the authors try to describe white-collar crime which is another name for cheating in business environment. For that reason, they give an example of Enron scandal, almost the biggest financial fraud scheme in history. The authors claim that people who represent the intellectual division don't know enough about the seriousness of the issue when the cheaters lead quiet and happy lives. Working through the answers, we can easily deduce that the correct answer is C.

jefferson introduced the idea that one does not change a government for "light" causes because he wanted to emphasize the seriousness of colonists' reasons for declaring independence.

anyone who was dealing with communism in soviet union in his time had an ideal picture of equality, freedom, the struggle of the working class for a better future, the success of the aristocracy's overthrow and the emancipation of subjugation.   however, anyone who would go to soviet union to see the functioning of the communist system, would be convinced that it was about sad people, about everyday bad life, about the brutal attitude of communist leaders, about ill obsession to completely exterminate every thought on aristocracy. thus, orwell wanted to show all the absurdity, the brutality of the system, the unbearable rule of suspicious morality, the ignorant people who try to play professionally.

the answers are: b. and e.