Please explain the right answer

This topic has expert replies
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 23
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 9:58 pm

Please explain the right answer

by [email protected] » Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:28 am
22. Government Official: Clearly, censorship exists if we, as citizens, are not allowed to communicate what we are ready to communicate at our own expense or if other citizens are not permitted access to our communications at their own expense. Public unwillingness to provide funds for certain kinds of scientific, scholarly, or artistic activities cannot, therefore, be described as censorship.

The flawed reasoning in the government official's argument is most parallel to that in which one of the following?
A. All actions that cause unnecessary harm to others are unjust; so if a just action causes harm to others, that action must be necessary.
B. Since there is more to good manners than simply using polite forms of address, it is not possible to say on first meeting a person whether or not that person has good manners.
C. Acrophobia, usually defined as a morbid fear of heights, can also mean a morbid fear of sharp objects. Since both fears have the same name, they undoubtedly have the same origin.
D. There is no doubt that a deed is heroic if the doer risks his or her own life to benefit another person. Thus an action is not heroic if the only thing it endangers is the reputation of the doer.
E. Perception of beauty in an object is determined by past and present influences on the mind of the beholder. Thus no object can be called beautiful, since not everyone will see beauty in it,
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 92
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 6:56 am
Thanked: 4 times

by abhigang » Mon Aug 23, 2010 2:05 am
[email protected] wrote:22. Government Official: Clearly, censorship exists if we, as citizens, are not allowed to communicate what we are ready to communicate at our own expense or if other citizens are not permitted access to our communications at their own expense. Public unwillingness to provide funds for certain kinds of scientific, scholarly, or artistic activities cannot, therefore, be described as censorship.

The flawed reasoning in the government official's argument is most parallel to that in which one of the following?
A. All actions that cause unnecessary harm to others are unjust; so if a just action causes harm to others, that action must be necessary.
B. Since there is more to good manners than simply using polite forms of address, it is not possible to say on first meeting a person whether or not that person has good manners.
C. Acrophobia, usually defined as a morbid fear of heights, can also mean a morbid fear of sharp objects. Since both fears have the same name, they undoubtedly have the same origin.
D. There is no doubt that a deed is heroic if the doer risks his or her own life to benefit another person. Thus an action is not heroic if the only thing it endangers is the reputation of the doer.
E. Perception of beauty in an object is determined by past and present influences on the mind of the beholder. Thus no object can be called beautiful, since not everyone will see beauty in it,
IMO D.
I am not 100% sure but others look more vague to me.

My reasoning went as this:-

the logic in the argument :-

The people are ready to buy or communicate at their own expense. This shows that they are willing.

X (peoples willingness to buy or communicate is prohibited) --> Y (censhorship)

Whereas the conclusion states
not X -> not Y.

We know that this is a flaw in the reasoning.

Scanning the answer choice, D has a similar logic structure:-

A (doer risks own life for the benefit of others, i.e., good reputation) -> B (action is heroic)

But the second statement says not A (endengering reputation) -> not B (action is not heroic).
Thus it also follows the same logic.

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 70
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2010 8:33 am

by SeemaSkl » Mon Aug 23, 2010 2:42 pm
IMO D

Definitely flaw in reasoning but this is the closest analogy I could make:

There can be censorship (there can be heroism) if there is willingness to pay (if there is risk to life). There cannot be censorship (there cannot be heroism) when there is no willingness to pay (when there is no risk to life).

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 23
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 9:58 pm

by [email protected] » Wed Aug 25, 2010 2:57 am
thanks guys.. D is the right ans..