- Question 1
Do watch the question as it was phrased–“Given the concepts introduced in class, whose statement, if true, will undermine Lena’s position (i.e., make it more likely to be false)?”
- Question 2
Note that the options only claim that someone has a correct understanding of the concept of political authority, not that everything the person has stated is true.
- Question 3
Note that the question refers to every instance of the “Sam” Argument. Hope this isn’t mysterious. Remember that I introduced “Sam” as an “Argument Template” (see Slide #16). Each time you fill in a different “X”, you get a different “instance” of the “Sam” Argument. For Lena–she’s basically saying that if you take any government + private pair, different moral standards properly apply to them. Some of you seem to be having trouble parsing the participle clauses in what Bern and Will said. Basically, “A’s being F is a sufficient condition for B’s being G” = “A is F” is a sufficient condition for “B is G“, etc.
- Question 6
See the Q/A for W06 and look for the bit that begins “You can hold everyone to the same general standards while…” for a hint.
- Question 8
You can interpret what Gene says as meaning: “A contract may not be necessary. They may be other good reasons for enforcing the proposed rule, e.g., to preserve our sanity.” And do remember you can focus on each person’s second sentence.
