PT24.S2.Q09 - historian: anyone who thinks that the terrors of the ancient regime

Comments

• c.janson35 Free Trial Inactive Sage Inactive ⭐

  July 2015 2398 karma

  First, we should zero in on what the argument is trying to prove. The conclusion, indicated by "so", is claiming that at least some of the people of Q were murderers. Therefore, we need an answer choice that offers a principle that would allow us to reach this conclusion. Right away I would focus on the two choices that explicitly mention murder, because again we are trying to prove that some people are murderers.
  
  A: this choice says that something does not justify murder, but does not make any claims as to if someone is in fact a murderer. Because we are not trying to prove that a murder was not justified, we can eliminate that answer.
  
  C is the only remaining answer that deals with murder, and can be diagrammed like this:
  
  EPU---->M
  
  This choice looks promising from the get-go. Murder is the necessary condition here, so the principle would in fact allow us to prove that some act is a murder. If the sufficient triggers, then we've found our correct answer. Was there an execution in pursuit of what is later found to be unattainable (EPU)? Yes! The stimulus says that the regime, made up of ordinary people, executed many people for a goal that was later found to be unrealizable. Thus, at least some of these ordinary people, according the the principle in C, were in fact murderers.
  
  As for the other answers:
  
  B: We are neither trying to prove nor justify fanaticism. Eliminate.
  We are neither trying to prove nor justify inhumanity. Eliminate.
  E: We are not trying to prove fanaticism. Eliminate.