Political philosopher: A just system

Answer choices

1. A

   Correct74% picked this

   Cars should be taxed in proportion to the danger that they pose. The most reliable measure of this danger is the speed at which

   Why this is right

   It's unusual for a correct answer to re-use a similar topic, like taxation in this case. Premise 1: Tax should be determined by danger. Premise 2: Most reliable way to determine danger is car's top speed. Conclusion: Tax should be based solely on car's acceleration.

   Skill tested: Parallel Flaw · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   74%
2. B

   Weak Premise Match6% picked this

   People should be granted autonomy in proportion to their maturity. A certain psychological test was designed to provide an objective measure of maturity. Therefore,

   Premise 1: Autonomy should be determined by maturity. Premise 2: This test is a way to objectively measure maturity. This is already falling off track, since the original was saying that wealth was the most objective way, and this is just saying it's an objective way. The conclusion should sound like, "Autonomy should be determined solely by this test". Instead, the CONCLUSION makes a weirdly specific claim that isn't proportional. It just has a cut-off level (above this level, you get autonomy ... below, you don't).

   6%
3. C

   Trap9% picked this

   Everyone should pay taxes solely in proportion to the benefits they receive from government. Many government programs provide subsidies for large corporations. Therefore, a

   Bad Conclusion Match Bad Premise Match Topic Trap This topic and wording is so similar to the original, it screams "trap answer". But in the original, the "just system" line was a premise. Here, it's the conclusion. The "solely proportional" was the conclusion of the original. Here, it's a premise. If we weren't already convinced it was a poor match, the 2nd premise contains no language like "this metric is the most objective"

   9%
4. D

   Bad Premise Match Bad Conclusion Match7% picked this

   Individuals who confer large material benefits upon society should receive high incomes. Those with high incomes should pay correspondingly high taxes. Therefore, we as

   The first claim sounds a bit like "we should determine who receives high incomes based on how much they confer large material benefits upon society". But the second claim doesn't sound like "the most objective way to determine whether they confer large material benefits is ____ ". And the conclusion doesn't sound like, "Thus how much high income someone gets should be solely proportional to _____ ".

   7%
5. E

   Missing 2nd Premise4% picked this

   Justice requires that health care be given in proportion to each individual's need. Therefore, we need to ensure that the most seriously ill hospital

   This only has one premise, so it's not going to match the original. The 2nd premise needs to tell us the best / most objective way to measure each person's need, if that's the way that health care should be determined.

   4%