PT118.S1.Q23 > 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 Question 25 Question 26

SECTION 2 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6

PASSAGE 2

Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14

PASSAGE 3

Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19

PASSAGE 4

Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27

SECTION 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · lr

The view that we can’t know what action is morally right would be true if an action’s being morally right were the same as the action’s having the best consequences. Why? We can only know some of the consequences of an action we perform.

The conclusion is about the possibility of determining if an action is morally right, but the argument’s premise says nothing about actions being morally right.

How to get from premise to conclusion? Based on the premise of the argument, we know that we can know only some consequences of an action we perform. The argument’s conclusion (that the view that in no situation can we know what action is morally right would be true if an action’s being morally right were the same as the action’s having the best consequences) would follow logically if we assume that an action having the best consequences is equivalent to only knowing some consequences of that action.

The argument isn’t focused on learning whether an action is morally wrong. The argument only focuses on the possibility of determining if an action is morally right.

The author argues for the possibility that we can’t determine whether an action is morally right. (B) states that we can sometimes know what action is morally right, so assuming (B) doesn’t validate the argument’s conclusion.

This bridges the gap between the argument’s premise and conclusion. The conclusion is about trying to determine if an action is morally right, yet the premise only addresses how we can only know some consequences of an action we perform. The argument’s conclusion follows logically if we assume (C).

The argument’s premise doesn’t discuss the immediate consequences of our actions. The premise is about how we can only know some consequences of an action we perform. (D) is irrelevant.

The argument’s conclusion isn’t concerned with whether an action can be morally right for some people but not others. The conclusion is only focused on the possibility of determining if an action is morally right in the first place.

PrepTest 118 - Section 1 - Question 23

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action