If a belief is based on information from a reliable source, then it is reasonable to maintain that belief. Furthermore, some beliefs are based on information from a reliable self-evident nor grounded in observable evidence.
What this question is testing
Statements
Two rules of the belief game. Rule one: if your belief comes from a reliable source, it counts as reasonable. Rule two: some beliefs DO come from reliable sources but are neither self-evident nor backed by observable evidence. Basically, there are beliefs out there that check the "reliable source" box but fail the "obvious" and "you can see it" tests.
Evaluate
Combine the rules: those beliefs from rule two — reliable source, not self-evident, not observable — automatically qualify as reasonable under rule one. So now we know there are reasonable beliefs floating around that are neither self-evident nor grounded in anything you can observe. They get their "reasonable" badge from the reliable source alone, without needing to be obvious or visible.
Goal
Find the answer that captures this combined result — reasonable beliefs exist that are not self-evident and not grounded in observable evidence.
Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.