Q4 - Suppose censorship is wrong

[patmichaelsmith]

Bizarre argument.

Understand E is correct because the example the author uses is clearly NOT an instance of censorship.

However, wouldn't D also be correct? The premise's analogy is so farfetched that it doesn't lead to the conclusion. There's no link between the two of them. They're inconsistent.

Thanks,

[ohthatpatrick]

Yeah, I agree this is an unusual argument, since it hinges more on recognizing the meaning of 'censorship' than it does on recognizing any logical problems.

Your question about (D) highlights a common misconception a lot of people have: "inconsistent" doesn't mean "irrelevant"; it actually means "contradictory".

Consistent, compatible, could be true, are all synonymous.

Inconsistent, incompatible, must be false, are all synonymous.

So whenever you see the word "inconsistent" in an answer choice, appreciate that it is a harsh accusation that an author has actually contradicted himself.

I'm hoping you'll agree that the premise, while irrelevant, does not contradict the conclusion.

Good luck.

[dandrew]

To "ohthatpatrick": does the author not contradict himself because he says "[b]ut this conclusion is absurd"?

[ohthatpatrick]

This is the conclusion:
Censorship is not wrong in itself

If a premise contradicts that conclusion, it would need to say:
Censorship IS wrong in itself.

There is no premise that states that, however, the author does cite modern liberals who tend to believe that. And the author plays out a thought experiment in which he's saying, "SUPPOSE they were correct." But he never ACCEPTS that they are correct, and (D) says that the author ACCEPTS the idea that censorship is wrong in itself.

If I say "suppose that pigs could fly ...", I'm not accepting the idea that they can fly, I'm just considering it for the sake of some hypothetical / counter-factual.

If I later affirm that "pigs cannot fly", I haven't contradicted myself, because I was never presenting the idea that 'pigs can fly' as an idea I accept.

Does that make sense?

[dandrew]

Yes, much clearer, thanks. I suppose the key word here is "suppose". The author tosses up the idea, shoots it down and then finally accepts a premise that says "this conclusion is absurd".