While the population of city X is approximately one-half that of city Y, the number of city X residents who are patients in hospitals is only one-fourth that of the number of city Y residents who are patients in hospitals.

"Surprising" Phenomenon
Why is the ratio of X residents who are patients in hospitals to Y residents who are patients in hospitals lower than the ratio of X’s population to Y’s population?

Objective
This is an EXCEPT question. The four wrong answers should suggest a potential difference between X’s residents and Y’s residents that could lead to X’s residents being less likely to go to the hospital. For example, maybe X’s residents are healthier than Y’s residents, or maybe X’s residents have worse access to hospitals than Y’s residents.

A
Preventive health programs are more prevalent in city X than in city Y.
This is a potential causal mechanism that could explain why X’s residents are less likely to go to the hospital. Maybe they have fewer illnesses that require going to the hospital because of their more prevalent preventive health programs.
B
The hospitals in city X are noted as leaders in employing outpatient treatment wherever possible.
Outpatient treatment is treatment outside a hospital. This suggests X residents get more outside-the-hospital treatment than Y residents. That could be why comparatively fewer X residents are patients “in” hospitals.
C
The drinking water of city Y has dangerously high levels of pollutants, whereas this is not the case for city X.
This is a potential causal mechanism that could explain why X’s residents are less likely to go to the hospital. More dangerous water in Y could lead to more illness among Y residents, which might lead to more need for treatment in a hospital.
D
The hospitals in city Y are of very high quality, and residents of city X are often sent there for treatment.
We’re not trying to explain why X’s hospitals have fewer patients. We’re trying to explain why fewer X residents are patients in a hospital (regardless of location). X residents who go to hospitals in Y are still counted as “X residents who are patients in hospitals.”
E
The lifestyle in city X is significantly less stressful than the lifestyle in city Y.
This is a potential causal mechanism that could explain why X’s residents are less likely to go to the hospital. Less stressful lifestyles could lead to better health and less need to go to the hospital. A potential connection between stress and health is reasonable.

16 comments

Ethicist: A person who treats others well is more worthy of praise if this treatment is at least partially motivated by feelings of compassion than if it is entirely motivated by cold and dispassionate concern for moral obligation. This is so despite the fact that a person can choose to do what is morally right but cannot choose to have feelings.

Summary

Who is more worthy of praise? A person who treats others well partially out of feelings of compassion, or a person who treats others well entirely out of of moral obligation? The person motivated by feelings is more worthy of praise.

People can choose to do what is morally right.

People cannot choose to have feelings.

Notable Valid Inferences

People can be more worthy of praise even when they are motivated by something they cannot control than when they are motivated by something that they can control.

A
Only actions that are at least partially the result of a person’s feelings should be used in measuring the praiseworthiness of that person.

Could be true. The author believes a person motivated by compassion is more worthy of praise. So he could believe that only actions resulting from feelings should be used in determining praiseworthiness.

B
If a person feels compassion toward the people affected by that person’s actions, yet these actions diminish the welfare of those people, that person does not deserve praise.

Could be true. The stimulus only tells us about who is more or less deserving of praise. This is a relative relationship. We do not know who does or does not deserve praise.

C
Only what is subject to a person’s choice should be used in measuring the praiseworthiness of that person.

Must be false. We know a person who’s motivated by feelings, which we can’t control, is more worthy of praise than a person who’s motivated by obligation, which we can control. So the author disagrees with the idea that praiseworthiness depends only on stuff we can choose.

D
Someone who acts without feelings of compassion toward those affected by the actions is worthy of praise if those actions enhance the welfare of the people affected.

Could be true. The stimulus only tells us about who is more or less deserving of praise. This is a relative relationship. We do not know who is or is not worthy of praise.

E
If someone wants to have compassion toward others but does not, that person is worthy of praise.

Could be true. The stimulus only tells us about who is more or less deserving of praise. This is a relative relationship. We do not know who is or is not worthy of praise.


4 comments

This page shows a recording of a live class. We're working hard to create our standard, concise explanation videos for the questions in this PrepTest. Thank you for your patience!

Comment on this

This page shows a recording of a live class. We're working hard to create our standard, concise explanation videos for the questions in this PrepTest. Thank you for your patience!

2 comments

This page shows a recording of a live class. We're working hard to create our standard, concise explanation videos for the questions in this PrepTest. Thank you for your patience!

1 comment