Ethicist: Support Only when we know a lot about the events that led to an action are we justified in praising or blaming a person for that action—as we sometimes are. ██ ████ █████████ ██████ █████████ ████ █████ ████ ██ ██ ████ █ ███ █████ ███ ██████ ███████ ██ ██ ███ ███████ ██ █████ █████ ██ ██████ ████ ██████ ██ ██████ ██████████
The ethicist concludes that there are some situations in which we would still regard an action as freely performed even if we knew a lot about the events that led to said action. The support for this is the claim that, if we’re justified in praising or blaming a person for an action, then we must know a lot about the events that led to that action.
The conclusion is about regarding an action as freely performed, but the premise doesn’t mention that! At minimum, we need a “some” relationship to link the term “justified” from the premise with the term “regard action as freely performed” from the conclusion. We know that all justified actions are ones we know a lot about; if we knew that some were also actions we’d regard as freely performed, then we could conclude that there’s an overlap between “know about” and “regard as freely performed.”
Which one of the following, ██ ████████ ███████ ███ ██████████ ██ ███ ██████████ ████████ ██ ██ ████████ ██████
People should not ██ ████████ ██ ███████ ██ ██████ ██ █████ ███ ███████ ████ ████ ██████ ██ ██████████ ██████ █████ ████████
Whether an act ██ ███ ███ █████ ███ ██████ █████ ██ ██ █████████ ███████████ ██ ███ ██████████ ██ ███ ████ ███████████ ██████ ███████ █████ ████ ████
We can be █████████ ██ ████████ ██ ███████ █ ██████ ███ ██ ██████ ████ ████ ██ ██████ ████ ██████ ██ ██████ ██████████
The responsibility a ██████ █████ ███ ██ ██████ ██ ███ █ ██████ ██ ███████ ████████ ███ ███████████ ██ █████ ██ ██████ ███████ █████████ ███ ██████ ██████ ████ ███ ██████ ██ ███████████ ██████████
If we do ███ ████ ████ █████ ███ ██████ ███████ ██ ██ ███ █████ ███████ ██ ████ ██████ ████ ██████ ██ ██████ ██████████
