#13 - Alia: Hawthorne admits that he has influence with high

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Point at Issue. The correct answer choice is (B)

Both Alia and Martha would agree to the statement in answer choice (C), and thus it is incorrect. Answer choices (A) and (E) are more factual than moral in nature, and since the disagreement is definitely moral in nature, both are incorrect.

Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice. The argument in the stimulus is a classic "does the end justify the means" disagreement. Alia says emphatically that there can be "no justification" for Hawthorne's behavior. So, no matter what the result, Hawthorne's behavior is unjustified. Martha disagree with that sentiment, citing the outcome of benefiting the public as justifying what Hawthorne did. Because the end was of value to the public, Martha indicates that Hawthorne was not unethical. the issue then, is whether the results of Hawthorne's actions can affect whether they are ethical. Alia says no, Martha says yes, and thus this is the correct answer.

[Trey]

Why not D?

[Dave Killoran]

Hi Trey,

Thanks for the question! The one direct reference we have to "public" is in Martha's final sentence, where she indicates that Hawthorne's work benefited the public. This is some evidence of her views on the public meaning of ethical behavior, but not on her view of the private meaning of ethical behavior. That puts (D) in trouble immediately because uncertainty is often the kiss of death in Point at Issue answers.

Regardless, let's continue on. Is there then evidence that her view on the meaning of ethical behavior in public vs private is different than Alia's? I'd say no. In Alia's case, she references "high government officials" which to me reads as a public situation since it involves the government, and then an "environmental interest group," which also seems like a public situation. I don't see anything in her statements about private situations, and thus I can't see a way to know what she (or Martha) thinks about the meaning of ethical behavior in a private situation.

So, even reading each person's statements as generously as positive in favor of (D), I don't see how we get to a place where we know they disagree. It could easily be that had this same situation happened in a wholly private affair that they'd have the same opinions.

Please let me know if that helps. Thanks!