PrepTest 80, Section 2, Question 13
If the purpose of laws is to contribute to people's happiness, we have a basis for criticizing existing laws as well as proposing new laws. Hence, if that is not the purpose, then we have no basis for the evaluation of existing laws, from which we must conclude that existing laws acquire legitimacy simply because they are the laws.
If the purpose of laws is to contribute to people's happiness, we have a basis for criticizing existing laws as well as proposing new laws. Hence, if that is not the purpose, then we have no basis for the evaluation of existing laws, from which we must conclude that existing laws acquire legitimacy simply because they are the laws.
If the purpose of laws is to contribute to people's happiness, we have a basis for criticizing existing laws as well as proposing new laws. Hence, if that is not the purpose, then we have no basis for the evaluation of existing laws, from which we must conclude that existing laws acquire legitimacy simply because they are the laws.
If the purpose of laws is to contribute to people's happiness, we have a basis for criticizing existing laws as well as proposing new laws. Hence, if that is not the purpose, then we have no basis for the evaluation of existing laws, from which we must conclude that existing laws acquire legitimacy simply because they are the laws.
The reasoning in the argument is flawed in that the argument
takes a sufficient condition for a state of affairs to be a necessary condition for it
infers a causal relationship from the mere presence of a correlation
trades on the use of a term in one sense in a premise and in a different sense in the conclusion
draws a conclusion about how the world actually is on the basis of claims about how it should be
infers that because a set of things has a certain property, each member of that set has the property
0 Comments