Summary
Some people claim that video games are morally corrupting because they allow people to imagine themselves transgressing conventional morality. However, this same criticism was applied in the past to many other forms of popular culture during their early stages of development.
Strongly Supported Conclusions
And just as it now seems silly to suggest that reading novels is morally corrupting, eventually the criticism surrounding video games will also fade.
A
we should expect most new forms of popular culture to be criticized as morally corrupting
We do not know if most new forms of popular culture will be criticized in their early stages. We only know that some new forms of popular culture in the past were criticized.
B
we should prefer forms of popular culture that have matured to those that are still in their early stages of development
We do not know what forms of popular culture one should prefer.
C
we can expect these concerns about video games to fade over time
If criticisms surrounding novels faded over time, then criticisms surrounding video games will also fade over time.
D
we should condemn forms of popular culture that allow people to imagine themselves transgressing conventional morality
The argument does not make a determination about what forms of popular culture we should condemn. We only know that some new forms are condemned or were condemned in the past.
E
it is silly to suggest that video games do not allow people to imagine themselves transgressing conventional morality
The argument concedes that video games allow people to imagine themselves transgressing conventional morality.
Summary
The author concludes that Landis violated his official duties. This is based on the fact that Landis’s spending of $10,000 was immoral.
Missing Connection
The conclusion asserts that Landis violated his official duties. But we have no idea from the premise or from the contextual statements what Landis’s official duties include. Why does spending $10,000 in a way that’s immoral constitute a violation of official duties? We want to learn that Landis’s official duties require the avoidance of immoral spending.
A
The money Landis used was not his own money.
Learning the origin of the money does not establish what is part of Landis’s official duties or whether spending money immorally is a violation of those duties.
B
It is immoral to spend money on luxury items when there are people who lack basic necessities.
We already know as a premise that Landis’s spending was clearly immoral. Our goal is to prove that Landis’s spending was a violation of official duties. (B) doesn’t establish what is part of Landis’s official duties or whether spending money immorally is a violation of those duties.
C
Landis knew about or participated in the decision to redecorate his office.
What Landis knew concerning the redocoration doesn’t establish what is part of Landis’s official duties or whether spending money immorally is a violation of those duties.
D
Every public official has an official duty never to perform immoral actions.
(D) establishes that avoiding immoral actions (such as immoral spending) is part of Landis’s official duties. So the fact that Landis engaged in immoral spending proves that Landis violated his official duty to avoid immoral actions.
E
Had Landis not spent the money redecorating the office, it would have been used to help alleviate poverty in the city.
What Landis would have done with the money had he not spent it on redecorating doesn’t establish what is part of Landis’s official duties or whether spending money immorally is a violation of those duties.
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that when a business performs a notably ethical action, the news media should publicize the fact that the business performed that action. This is based on the following premises. People should purchase from businesses that meet high ethical standards. News media should help people to make purchases from business that meet high ethical standards. And, when people learn of a business’s ethical conduct, that often motivates them to purchase from that business.
Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that a business that performed a notably ethical action is a business that “meets high ethical standards.”
A
Some businesses that have high ethical standards do not actually meet those standards.
Having high ethical standards and meeting high ethical standards are different concepts, and the argument isn’t concerned with having high standards. The argument is only concerned with whether performing an ethical action constitutes meeting high ethical standards.
B
Meeting high ethical standards is primarily a matter of refraining from unethical behavior.
This points out why performing a notably ethical action doesn’t necessarily constitute meeting high ethical standards. We don’t know whether a business that performs a notably ethical action is refraining from unethical actions, so we don’t know that it’s meeting high standards.
C
It is relatively easy for a business to meet its ethical standards if it does not set them very high.
Whether a business sets its own standards and meets its own standards is a separate from whether a business meets high ethical standards. We have no reason to think high standards are based on a business’s own standards.
D
The news media is more likely to publicize a business’s unethical conduct than it is to publicize a business’s ethical conduct.
What the news media currently does has no impact on an argument concerning what news media should do. The author concludes that news media should do something; how often they currently do that thing doesn’t impact whether they should do it.
E
Some businesses that meet high ethical standards would not do so if they could not remain profitable while meeting those standards.
Profits have no clear connection to the argument. Even if a business is partially concerned with profits when it meets high ethical standards doesn’t change the fact that it meets high ethical standards.