#7 - Philosopher: Both the consequences and the motives of

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Assumption. The correct answer choice is (B)

The philosopher begins with a general observation about the moral worth of human actions, but the crux of his argument can be found in the second sentence of the stimulus. The conclusion resides in the first clause (“to be a moral agent one must have free will”), which is followed by a premise (“one cannot be a moral agent without desiring to conform to a principle”). Note the premise indicator “because” in the beginning of the second clause. After applying the Unless Equation to the premise, the argument can be diagrammed as follows:

• Premise: Moral agent Desire to conform
  
  Conclusion: Moral agent Free will

Because this is an assumption question, the answer you select must contain a statement upon which the argument depends, i.e. a statement that is necessary for the conclusion to be true. A careful analysis of the conditional structure of the argument shows a logical gap between the necessary conditions in the premise and the conclusion. The argument relies on the assumption that desiring to conform to a principle requires free will:

• Supporter Assumption: Desire to conform Free will

This prephrase agrees with answer choice (B), which is the correct answer choice. We can also determine the correct answer by the process of elimination. First, if you see a new or “rogue” element in the conclusion (“free will”), look for a Supporter assumption that connects the new element to the rest of the argument. Second, if you see a term common to both the premise and the conclusion (“moral agent”), be wary of answer choices that restate it. These observations alone are sufficient to eliminate all answer choices except for answer choice (B).

Note that the first sentence of the stimulus has no bearing on the rest of the argument. We know this because of the contrastive sentence connector “nonetheless” at the beginning of the second sentence. Although such connectors are not conclusion indicators per se, they always introduce information that is unexpected or surprising in light of the information given in the previous sentence. In this particular instance, the first sentence is not necessary for the argument to make any sense. Therefore, no assumptions were made regarding the claims mentioned in it.

Answer choice (A): This answer choice can be immediately eliminated because it does not connect “free will” to the rest of the argument. Also, having a concern for the consequences of one’s actions is a contextual observation made in the first sentence that plays no structural role in the argument.

Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice, as it properly connects the necessary condition in the premise to that in the conclusion, and is the only answer choice that brings up the issue of “free will”:

• Moral agent Desire to conform Free will

We can easily prove that answer choice (B) contains an assumption by negating it, as the logical opposite of the correct answer choice must weaken the conclusion:

• Desiring to conform to a principle does NOT require free will.

If true, this assertion would show that moral agents need not have free will, directly undermining the main point of the philosopher’s position. Because the logical opposite of answer choice (B) weakens the conclusion of the argument, this answer choice contains an assumption upon which the argument depends.

Answer choice (C): As with answer choice (A), this answer choice can be immediately eliminated because it does not connect “free will” to the rest of the argument (being “free” is not equivalent in meaning to having “free will”). Also, the argument need not make any assumptions about whether freedom requires taking the consequences of our actions into account.

Answer choice (D): The author makes no assumptions about the relationship between desire and morality in general: the desire described in the premise is specific to the idea of conforming to a principle. Furthermore, this claim comes very close to being a Mistaken Reversal of the central premise of the argument, testing your ability to correctly interpret conditional statements:

• Premise: Moral agent Desire to conform
  Answer choice (D): Desire Moral agent

Since no statement presupposes the validity of its Mistaken Reversal, answer choice (D) is incorrect.


Answer choice (E): What determines the moral worth of one’s actions—their consequences and motives—is an idea introduced in the first sentence of the stimulus. As discussed above, this sentence plays no structural role in the argument. To test if answer choice (E) contains an assumption, apply the Assumption Negation Technique, and ask yourself, “What would the author say to this negation?”

• We can perform morally worthy actions even if we do NOT conform to a principle.

Since the conclusion deals with the relationship between moral agents and free will, the logical opposite of answer choice (E) has no bearing on the issue at stake.

[Jiya]

Prep Test 66/ Section 4/ Q7

Hello!

I have a question regarding the process of arriving at the correct answer. I get why B is correct - in fact, I lingered over B before selecting another answer. Truth is that the premise in the first sentence threw me off. Seems like it had no relevance on the correct answer and I could have landed on B if the stimulus had been just the second sentence! How would I know to not take the first sentence, in this case, into consideration at all?

[Lucas Moreau]

Hello, Jiya,

Yes, it's as annoying as it is true: sometimes the test makers will give you sentences that are completely irrelevant to the answer.

Unfortunately, there's no fast way to figure out what's relevant and what isn't, since the way they phrase these questions is all over the place. Prephrasing can help a lot, as you'll intuitively be drawn to the parts of the stimulus that fit the question type indicated in the question stem.

Most of the time, everything will be at least somewhat relevant. Best to just treat everything as if it is - but if you get a correct answer without the help of one or two sentences, remember that that's certainly possible.

Hope that helps,
Lucas Moreau

[lathlee]

For the future reference if a same type of assumption question is asked

Premise: Moral agent Desire to conform

Conclusion: Moral agent Free will

but in the answer choices, there is Supporter Assumption: Desire to conform : arrow: Moral agent.

is that correct? cuz in that way Desire to conform Moral agent Free will

[Adam Tyson]

That would not work, lathlee, because you would have no evidence supporting the claim that a moral agent must have free will. That is the conclusion, and to get there you have to connect to the new element in the conclusion, which here is "free will". Imagine your argument, without the conclusion:

Premise: If you are a moral agent, you must have a desire to conform.
+
Your answer: If you have a desire to conform, you are a moral agent

How would you ever get from there to any conclusion about having or not having free will? You couldn't, so your answer is not a necessary assumption of the argument. It makes no link, as a good assumption must do. Instead, follow the path laid out in the explanation here and connect the two "rogue" elements to each other. That's the way to identify an assumption, as well as many strengthen and justify the conclusion answers.

Keep at it, you'll get there!