Self-study
Support Many employers treat their employees fairly. █████ █████ ██████ ██ █ █████ ██ █████ ███ ████ ██ ███ ██████ ███████ █████████████ ██ ███████ ██ ███████
Summary
Using someone for selfish reasons isn’t necessarily morally bad or harmful, because some employers are fair to their employees.
Notable Assumptions
As the argument is written, we have no idea why employer treatment of employees has anything to do with using someone for selfish reasons. The author is assuming that employer-employee relationships are an example of that dynamic.
3.
The argument requires the assumption ████
a
some employers act ██ █ ███████ █████████████ ██████ ████ ████ ████ ████ █████ ████ ████ ██████
We don’t need to conditionally link morally reprehensibility to harm. The negation of (A) is that some employers can be morally reprehensible whether or not they harm employees. That doesn’t hurt the argument.
b
no employers who ███ ███████ ███ █████ █████████ ██ █ █████ ██ █████ ███ ████
(B) would devastate the argument. The negation of (B) is necessary: it must be true that some morally upright employers use their employees as a means to their own ends.
c
some or all █████████ ███ █████ █████████ ██ █ █████ ██ █████ ███ ████
This must be true. If no employers do this, then the example the author gave has nothing to do with the conclusion.
d
making a profit ████ ███ █████ ██ ██████ ██ ██████████ ████████████ ███ █████ ███████
A simplified negation of (D) is: “making a profit from the labor of others is sometimes harmful.” First, we have to assume that employers are making a profit from the labor of others, and even if we do, the fact that some employers are guilty of harm doesn’t wreck the argument.
e
it is not ████████ ██ ████ ███████ ████ ███████ ████████ ████ ██████ ██ █ █████ ██ █████ ███ ████
If negated, (E) would be: “It is possible to harm someone whether or not you treat them as a means to your own ends.” The argument is unaffected by this.