LR Question 20 Explanation
QUESTION TEXT: Daniel: There are certain actions that moral duty…
QUESTION TYPE: Point At Issue
ARGUMENTS: Daniel says we must perform some actions due to moral obligations. But to be good, an action must have the right motivations.
Carrie says we can’t control our motivations. So the only necessary condition for an action to be good is that it fulfills a moral obligation.
ANALYSIS: They disagree on whether right motivations are required for an action to be good.
___________
- Neither of them mentions impossible actions.
- Neither says why an act might not be good even if it meets the necessary conditions, such as fulfilling an obligation or having the right motivations.
- Neither talks about why we do actions. Maybe some moral obligations are fulfilled by accident.
- CORRECT. Daniel agrees with this. Carrie says that good actions only need to fulfill moral obligations.
- Nonsense. Neither of them mentioned sufficient conditions for something being good. And this condition doesn’t make sense – it’s possible for someone to have a mistaken sense of moral duty.
More Resources for Point at Issue Questions
- Intro Course lesson: This intro course lesson covers Point at Issue questions.
- Mastery Seminar lesson: This LR Mastery seminar lesson covers point at issue questions.
Can you say that the statement A->B disagrees with the statement B->A?
Apparently you can say that. Given A, the first statement has to say that B follows whereas the second statement does not have to because confirming A is affirming its necessary condition, hence B is free to float in this case. What do you think?
No disagreement. If only B –> A is true, then it’s correct that if you have A, you don’t need B. But both statements can be true at once. Then the statement merely becomes bidirectional.
Thanks a lot!