The meaning that is expressed by the authors and understood by most of their intended audience obviously includes a certain level of ‘not entirely unrealistic or impractical’ in what it takes to qualify as an ‘option’.
The problem is that everybody has a different idea of what that level should be. Thus the authors are effectively relying on the illusion of transparency to make their proposal sound more reasonable then it is.
The problem is that everybody has a different idea of what that level should be. Thus the authors are effectively relying on the illusion of transparency to make their proposal sound more reasonable then it is.
I think I agree with that much.