It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Can someone explain the reasoning of this prompt? I chose A) - wrong asnwer but blind reviewing it, I understand it as being partially agreeable to the to the overall argument.
Comments
I'd also like an explanation- I got the answer correct, and I can explain why I thought C was correct, but I couldn't fully prove why A was incorrect. I could eliminate B, D, and E, because the stimulus does not mention what conditions would determine whether someone deserves praise or is worthy of it. The stimulus only mentions whether which treatment is more worthy.
In regards to C) Only what is subject to a person's choice should be used in measuring the praiseworthiness of that person, the stimulus mentions that a person cannot choose to have feelings. Therefore, the ethicist's argument that one's treatment is more worthy of praise if it is at least partially motivated by feelings of compassion means they did not have choice in the matter of having those feelings. So C cannot be true.
For A, the reason why I personally did not choose this answer, is because the stimulus states that treatment that is entirely motivated by cold and dispassionate concern for moral obligation is less worthy of praise- I was unsure if 'cold and dispassionate concern' could still be categorized as feelings, even if it is slightly described as lack thereof. Still, I couldn't completely eliminate this answer.
I'm not sure if my reasoning is correct, so please take it with a grain of salt. I hope an administrator ends up explaining this question thoroughly!