PT114.S4.Q21 > Question

SECTION 1 · lr

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24

SECTION 2 · lr

SECTION 3 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8

PASSAGE 2

Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14

PASSAGE 3

Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20

PASSAGE 4

Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27

SECTION 4 · lr

The author concludes that democracy does not promote freedom. He supports this conclusion by citing examples of of democratic societies that were not free and non-democratic societies that were free.

The author is confusing promoting democracy with being sufficient to cause it or necessary for it. If democracy were sufficient for freedom, then any democratic society would be inherently free. On the other hand, if democracy were necessary for freedom, then we would know that every free society was democratic. However, promoting something simply means supporting its development. Democracy could support freedom without being the one true cause of it; perhaps a non-free democratic country is missing several other crucial factors for freedom.

This is the cookie-cutter answer choice of sufficiency-necessity confusion. The author doesn’t take a necessary condition to be sufficient for something, or vice versa. Instead, he confuses promoting freedom with being a necessary or sufficient condition for it.

This argument does not deal with factors causing the rise of democracy in a society; rather, it deals with democracy as a factor that promotes political freedom.

The author’s examples of different regimes and their respective levels of freedom aren’t irrelevant to his argument; rather, these examples are relevant, as they pertain to the subject matter of his argument, but don’t support his conclusion that democracy doesn’t promote freedom.

The author shows in his examples that democracy is not sufficient or necessary for political freedom, but concludes something different—that democracy does not promote freedom. He does not recognize that promoting something is different than being sufficient or necessary for it.

The author does not bring personal opinion into this argument—instead, he uses examples of historical societies to support his conclusion, albeit erroneously.

PrepTest 114 - Section 4 - Question 21

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action