#23 - Essayist: The existence of a moral order in the

[Jkjones3789]

I am having a bit of trouble identifying the flaw is this flaw in the reasoning question. Could you please assist me with it. Thank You.

[Lucas Moreau]

Hello, Jkjones,

This is indeed a flaw of conditional reasoning. The trick there is that all flaws of conditional reasoning essentially boil down to the same mistake - confusing the sufficient condition with the necessary condition. There's lots of ways to phrase that, but that's what happens for both Mistaken Negations and Mistaken Reversals.

Here, the first sentence may be rewritten:

If there is a moral order in the universe such that bad is always eventually punished and good rewarded, then human souls are immortal. (The moral order depends on the immortality of souls - they're necessary.)

The last sentence is a Mistaken Reversal:

If human souls are immortal, then the bad will be punished.

Answer choice A describes, in very roundabout language, that a flaw of conditional reasoning is present. Which it is.

Something possibly crucial: the "i.e.," in the first sentence. You can think of "i.e.," as "in essence", meaning, this is the heart of the argument or the perfect emblematic example. By contrast, "e.g." can be thought of as "example given", which could be just one possible example of many and is not necessarily an accurate general descriptor. Just in case!

Hope that helps,
Lucas Moreau

[Johnclem]

Hi,
Is C wrong because it mixes up authors conclusion with premises ?


Thanks
John

[Shannon Parker]

Hi John,

Answer choice C in this question reverses the author's position. The author claims that a moral order depends on human souls being immortal, and from that concludes that if human souls are immortal that implies that there is a moral order.

While answer choice C is an example of the same type of mistaken causal reasoning, it does not describe it. Answer choice A is the only answer choice that describes how the author mistakenly switches the functions of the necessary and sufficient conditions.

Here the author takes the fact that human souls are necessary for there to be a moral order, as sufficient to produce that moral order.

Hope this helps.

~Shannon

[jcough346]

Is the first portion in the conclusion (before the comma), "but however...is represented," just a clunky word jumble to distract from the actual conclusion that follows the comma ("If humans...be punished")?

[Adam Tyson]

I'd say it's more of a clunky conclusion indicator than a distraction, jcough. I think it tells us that the conclusion is to follow. It's like "regardless" or "either way". Those both tend to indicate that a conclusion is to come next. But whether it's an indicator or merely a distraction, it surely isn't the conclusion of the argument or a part thereof. (See what I did there? )

[MikeJones]

I'd say it's more of a clunky conclusion indicator than a distraction, jcough. I think it tells us that the conclusion is to follow. It's like "regardless" or "either way". Those both tend to indicate that a conclusion is to come next. But whether it's an indicator or merely a distraction, it surely isn't the conclusion of the argument or a part thereof. (See what I did there? )

So we are to supposed to infer that "the bad will be punished" constitutes moral order? According to the stimulus, moral order also includes the good being rewarded.

[Francis O'Rourke]

The first sentence gives us a definition or a consequence of a moral order in the universe. The dash and "i.e." indicate that what follows is an explanation, a definition, or a clarification of the idea that was just introduced.

This sentence tells us that a moral order in the universe means that the bad will be punished and the good will be rewarded. Both will happen if a moral order in the universe exists. The argument's conclusion picks out only one of these two consequences. This makes no difference in terms of the validity of the argument. Whether the essayist concluded one or both occur if souls are immortal, the essayist still commits the Mistaken Reversal.

Let me know if this helps.

[hope0922]

Hi!!

Could someone please explain why answer choice B is incorrect, along with an example which when answer choice B would be correct in this scenario

[Adam Tyson]

Answer B is not accurately describing the flaw here, hope0922, because the author never says that these beliefs are correct. All they say is that IF certain of those beliefs are correct, then they would imply that another thing is also true. IF there is moral order, then human souls must be immortal.

For answer B to be correct, the stimulus would have had to conclude something like "and therefore, human souls must be immortal" or "there must, therefore, be some moral order to the universe." The author never made such absolute claims, though, and so they are not inferring that the beliefs are true.