PrepTest 126, Section 4, Question 19
Professor: It has been argued that freedom of(61 more words not shown)
The conclusion drawn by the(11 more words not shown)
- AThinkers who limit(14 more words not shown)
- BThinkers can mine(17 more words not shown)
- CIn societies that(9 more words not shown)
- DFreedom of thought(8 more words not shown)
- EWithout intellectual discipline,(7 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Why can't thinkers have both freedom and discipline?
The initial argument favors freedom of thought because people can follow ideas wherever they lead. I can see why that might help. Whether it is required is a further question: even in a restrictive setting, someone might still make progress on a permitted mathematical problem. But that's my question about the opening view. We need to understand the professor's own response.
The professor says progress requires thoroughly exploring connected ideas, which requires intellectual discipline. Fine. Why would that undermine freedom of thought? It's like insisting someone must choose chocolate or vanilla without explaining why they can't have both. A person might be free to pursue an idea and disciplined about working through it.
What we’re looking for
To make the professor's conclusion follow, we need the missing conflict. If protecting freedom of thought prevents the discipline that progress requires, the original argument for freedom loses its proposed route to progress. I'd look for a statement making freedom and discipline incompatible in that way.
Working the answers
- A
Being hindered by restricting oneself to an orthodoxy doesn't show that freedom conflicts with discipline. If anything, it gives us another reason to worry about limiting thought. The professor needs to connect the required discipline to a problem with the argument for freedom.
- B
This adds another condition for thoroughly exploring ideas: a society that values progress. But why couldn't a society both value progress and protect freedom of thought? B never establishes the conflict the professor's response needs.
- CCorrect
In societies protecting freedom of thought, thinkers always lack intellectual discipline. The professor says discipline is needed to explore ideas fully, and that exploration is needed for progress. Put those together: under C, protecting freedom leaves thinkers without something required for progress. That defeats the argument that the freedom to pursue ideas provides the claimed basis for intellectual progress.
- D
Creativity helping the discovery of truth gives a possible benefit of freedom. It doesn't show that free thinkers lack the discipline the professor says they need. Adding a benefit doesn't repair this attack on the argument for freedom.
- E
This makes discipline a requirement for freedom of thought. It doesn't prevent the two from existing together; a disciplined thinker could also have freedom. The professor needs freedom to conflict with the required discipline, not merely depend on it. E connects the ideas in the wrong way for that purpose.
More Sufficient Assumption questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Sufficient Assumption questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.