#19 - Any government practice that might facilitate the

[Administrator]

Please post below with any questions!

[cardigan_person]

Can someone explain this question? Clearly the wording on this is a little tricky or difficult to read.
For:
A. Is "too often" and "most" not interchangeable?
D. Is it too conclusive to accuse an official of abuse of power for concealing information without compelling reason? I realize from the premise that it says it ENABLES abuses of power, so abuse is something that happens over multiple occurrences?

[Kristintrapp]

Could you please walk through this question? I selected answer A.

I have tried diagramming it out, but really don't know how to get much further than:

undertake gov. practice (that might fac. abuse of power) --> compelling reason

Please walk me through this!

[Jonathan Evans]

Hi, Cardigan and Kristin,

Good questions! Let's step through this problem. To recap:

• P1: Undertake government practice that might facilitate abuse of power Compelling reason to do so
• P2: Keeping of government secrets (example of) government practice that might facilitate abuse of power
• P3: Conceal fact that keeping a government secret (example of) government practice that might facilitate abuse of power

Which of the following Must Be True?

Answer choice (A): We do not have sufficient evidence to infer whether government officials are not justified in concealing information in most cases, only that they do so "too often."

Answer choice (B): We do not know that an abuse of power will not occur in the event that the government has a compelling reason to keep a secret. Such an abuse might occur even though there is a compelling reason to keep this secret. The compelling reason is a necessary precondition for keeping a secret, but an abuse of power may occur anyways.

Answer choice (C): This is the credited response. If a government official is justifiably keeping a secret, this official is engaging in a practice that from P2 and P3 is an example of a practice that might facilitate the abuse of power. We know from P1 that if a government engages in a practice that might facilitate the abuse of power, it must have a compelling reason to do so. Therefore, we have sufficient evidence to justify the statement in this answer choice.

Answer choice (D): Concealing information without a compelling reason to do so is a violation of the principles articulated in the stimulus, but we do not have evidence that such concealing of information is itself an abuse of power.

Answer choice (E): We have no information in the stimulus to address the concept of relative ease or difficulty with which an official could commit an abuse of power. This concept is outside the scope of the problem.

I hope this helps!

[lsatnoobie]

I need help.

I still don’t get why C is correct because it says “A government official who JUSTIFIABLY.. keeps a secret”. According to premise 2 where we are told sometimes keeping of government secrets is justified, we infer that justified = having a compelling reason.

So I’m confused by the wording of C because it seems like it’s saying

A government official who justifiably (aka has a compelling reason) keeps a secret should not conceal its existence without having a compelling reason to do. What’s with the internal contradiction here?

A government official who keeps a secret for a compelling reason, should not conceal its existence unless it has a compelling reason? But … it does have a compelling reason according to the word “justifiably”.

Can someone please point out where I’m wrong?

[Brook Miscoski]

lsatnoobie,

Take a look at the last sentence of the stimulus. There are two risk at play here--first, keeping a secret; second, not telling the public that you have a secret.

With that in mind, look at choice C, which focuses on the second risk. Even if you are justified in keeping the secret, there should be a compelling reason for concealing the existence of the secret.

It does seem a bit weird--what is the official supposed to do? Tap everyone on the shoulder, lean over, and whisper, "I have a secret," and then run off giggling? I can't speak for the distinctions and expectations of political philosophers, just for their grammatical constructs.

[MrMola]

Would answer choice B be a mistaken reversal?

[Malila Robinson]

Hi MrMola,
It can be an MR of the first sentence, you need to change the words a bit to see it, but the pattern is there. Great job!
-Malila

[ataraxia10]

Is E incorrect because it didn't narrow the range of government officials who are qualified to keep secrets like choice C?

[Erik Shum]

Hi Ataraxia,

The correct answer choice must be true; it does not necessarily have to narrow which government officials (or, more accurately, when government officials) are justified in keeping secrets. This question is specifically asking you to make an inference: arrive at a conclusion that you know to be true based on the stimulus, but that is not explicitly stated in the stimulus.

The stimulus author certainly believes that a government official can be justified in keeping secrets (sentence three). But the author does not say that a government official can only be justified in keeping secrets where doing so does not facilitate the abuse of power (sentence one and two combine to suggest that, generally, the practice of keeping secrets might facilitate abuse of power).

It cannot be inferred from that stimulus the the only justification for keeping secrets is where doing so does not facilitate the abuse of power. In fact, based on those sentences paraphrased above, it is likely that the author accepts that a government official can be justified in keeping a secret that facilitates the abuse of power (for example, where other considerations like national security outweigh the risk of abuse).