PrepTest 128, Section 4, Question 26

What we’re looking for

Working the answers

• A

  Too broad. A doesn't say to take no action whenever we lack complete information. It still recommends judging primarily by consequences, despite our limited knowledge.

• B

  Deterrence appears in B's final argument, not A's. A doesn't rank the fairness of a punishment against its ability to deter crime.

• C

  “We should aim at perfect justice” conflicts with A's recommendation. A says human legal systems should not try to dispense cosmic justice. Recognizing that it's unattainable is only half of this choice.

• D

  This would prevent judgment until we knew every relevant factor. A instead offers a workable form of judgment that doesn't require weighing all those inputs. It restricts the ambition of human judgment rather than prohibiting judgment altogether.

• E
  Correct

  A moves from cosmic justice being impossible for humans to the recommendation that human law shouldn't try to deliver it. This principle makes that step work: don't attempt a goal known to be impossible.

  B's argument takes a different route. It distinguishes impartial procedure from cosmic justice and warns that reducing punishment can undermine deterrence. That criticism doesn't depend on the principle that impossible goals shouldn't be attempted. B needn't reject the principle; it simply doesn't rely on it here.