the objective here is to think very precisely. You are privy to the following conversation between Smith and Jones:
Smith: Diversity causes conflict.
Jones: No, diversity promotes cooperation.
Smith: Moreover, diversity causes inefficiency.
Jones: Wrong again! It promotes efficiency.
Smith: Finally, diversity causes poverty.
Jones: Absolute nonsense! It promotes prosperity.

Smith and Jones ask you, as a political science familiar with sophisticated research methods, to adjudicate and decide who is right and who is wrong. How would you do that? In developing your answer, remember to define your concepts, formulate simple abstract causal statements, provide convincing, reliable concrete empirical evidence for and against your simple abstract causal statements, and give a concrete answer to Smith and Jones’ query

For example, if you agree with the majority of what Smith says, you also have to argue against him on somethings. Each cause has to be adressed in whether you agree or not and also providing empirical evidence. Define the key words such as Diversity, conflict, inefficiency, etc while formulating your argument. Remember you’re picking if you agree with Jones or Smith but you also have to counter argue why they may be incorrect in some cases.