PT129.S3.Q12 > 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

SECTION 2 · lr

SECTION 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5

PASSAGE 2

Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12

PASSAGE 3

Question 13 Question 14 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

To be effective, a law must be enforced. Police enforce society’s laws, making those laws effective. There is no international police force, therefore international laws are not effective.

This argument moves from the claim that police enforce a society’s laws to claiming that, because there is no international police force, there are no effective ways of enforcing international law. However, the argument does not state that police are the only possible enforcement mechanism - only that they play the role of enforcing a society’s laws. There is a necessary assumption here that there is no other way of enforcing other laws. If international laws could be enforced by someone other than international police, they could still be effective.

This is too strong. The argument does not need to make this huge claim that absolutely nobody obeys commands without mechanisms compelling obedience - it is only focused on the notion of an effective law.

This argument is focused on the consequences of the absence of an international police force. It doesn’t need to make assumptions about what would happen if such a force existed - it only needs to focus on the current reality where it doesn't.

There could still be lots of other differences between the types of laws - the argument is only focused on this specific notion of effectiveness which is tied to enforcement.

It doesn’t matter for the argument if a police force has lots of purposes. The argument only needs to claim that police do enforce these laws and make them effective, not that doing so is their primary purpose.

This fills the argument’s gap - if it were false, and other mechanisms could enforce international law, then international law could be effective even though it doesn’t have a police force.

PrepTest 129 - Section 3 - Question 12

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action