Lesson 9: Question 7

[T.B.Justin]

I am curious of the fact test for the incorrect answer choice (D):

That states, "A warning about the difficulty of suppressing the truth."

I want to point out the last sentence of the stimulus, "Nothing is ever gained by forcing citizens to disseminate their thoughts in secret."

I had a sense that "suppressing the truth" makes the fact test check according to "disseminate their thoughts in secret," and "a warning about the difficulty" to "nothing is ever gained by forcing citizens to".

I feel this implies a warning about the difficulty of suppressing the truth.

Why doesn't this meet the facts of the stimulus? Is it because, this statement is a premise and not the conclusion, and its just one piece of the persuasion used, but not the primary form?

[Jay Donnell]

Hey T.B.!

I think the major issue here with D is the intended meaning of difficulty. When the answer describes a "warning about the difficulty of suppressing the truth," I believe it implies that the argument showed just how hard it would be for a government to suppress truth.

With whistleblowers, "leakers" and modern means like Twitter available to the public, I would imagine it would be difficult to really suppress the truth in today's society, but perhaps I'm just naive! Here, with the last retort of the stimulus referring to how "nothing is ever gained by forcing citizens to disseminate their thoughts in secret," it's meant to imply how counter-productive and ineffective it would be to bring down some sort of Orwellian control that disallowed for free speech. But, counter-productive and inefficient here are not equivalent to difficult.

The right answer in C, which in itself is tough to decipher and not a particularly common or universal method of argumentation, refers to the coupling of moral ideals with self-interest in that the argument advocated for freedom of speech by alluding to its status as a basic human right (moral) and that it is rational in that it fosters good ideas and squashes bad ones (self-interest).

Hope that helps!

[T.B.Justin]

Hey Jay,

Thanks for responding.

So, difficulty does not equate to "nothing is ever gained by forcing citizens to."

I still think that the latter part of answer choice (D) is accurate for the fact test, that "suppressing the truth" makes the fact test check according to "disseminate their thoughts in secret."

Does spreading thoughts in secret equate to suppressing the truth, I think so, if its in secret its not being openly publicized, which I feel is suppressing the truth.

In reference to the correct answer choice (C), what are the moral ideas being coupled, freedom of speech and basic human right?

[Jay Donnell]

Hey!

Yes, difficult implies hard to accomplish or implement, which doesn't apply to this situation. Counter-productive, inefficient or impractical would have been more appropriately used instead to relate to the idea that "nothing is ever gained by" taking an action. For example, if I was trying to get in better shape, nothing is ever gained by simply watching workout videos while sitting on my couch. I could call that strategy ineffective or even useless, but I wouldn't call it "difficult."


"Suppressing the truth" can absolutely be in line with forcing the populous to "disseminate their thoughts in secret" in that it implies people are not allowed to speak their concerns out loud, which in effect can be seen to suppress the truth.

That is not the issue with the answer, however, as in my mind it hinges exclusively on the misplaced term "difficulty."

The 'moral' ideals brought up in C are in reference to calling freedom of speech a "basic human right." In hopefully not too much of a stretch, why do people care about human rights violations? Because they are illegal, or because they are immoral?


Hopefully that helps!

[T.B.Justin]

Hey Jay,

So, "nothing is ever gained by" is best understood as something that is impractical, counter-productive, ineffective. Can it be simplified as something that is "not good," I think that might be too far of a stretch on this idea, but maybe it could work in some instances, and difficulty is best understood as implying something that is hard to accomplish or implement, such as, the difficulty instilling morals in children. It can be an extensive process that takes place from early childhood through adolescence development, or perhaps the difficulty coming to terms on an argument with a significant other where each person is firm on their position.

I think people care about humans rights violations because they are immoral, and likely why there are laws protecting human rights, since people feel human rights violations are immoral and to prevent them its best to have laws to ensure their illegality, so is this the coupling of 'moral' ideals?

[Jay Donnell]

Yep, I like your analysis of the coupling of moral ideals!

And for the first part, without oversimplifying too much, difficult should mean its standard definition: hard.

I think 'not good' would be a bit of a stretch, and best to leave 'nothing ever gained by' as more representative of ineffective or useless.

[T.B.Justin]

I agree that its too far of a stretch, that is the actual thought process I have, I just altered it into a question to get your opinion on the matter, sounds good for 'nothing ever gained by' as more or less representative of ineffective.