For any given kind of judgment, two issues of justification might
arise, one concerning the type of judgment,
the other an instance of it. First, there is the question of
establishing the credentials of that kind of judgement to
being a bona fide judgement, a judgement with a well-founded claim to
intersubjective validity, instances of
which can have a genuine truth-value. Secondly, there is the question
of how, if at all, it is possible to establish,
perhaps conclusively, that a particular instance of that kind of
judgement is correct (and in particular, what the
canonical or most fundamental method of doing this is—for there are
usually many methods of establishing the
truth of a judgement). So for aesthetic judgements, or aesthetic
judgements of a particular kind, there is, first, the
issue of establishing the legitimacy of the claim to intersubjective
validity, if such a claim is built into them,
and, second, the issue of showing that, of the opposed aesthetic
judgements that might be made about a certain
thing, this judgement is right, that one wrong.
In the Critique of Aesthetic Judgement Kant‘s leading idea is that an
aesthetic judgement about an item is a
judgement the ̳determining ground‘ of which cannot be other than the
subject‘s pleasure or displeasure in
experiencing the item. In other words, the judgement must be based on
the subject‘s hedonic reaction to the
item. This criterion is intended to apply to kinds of judgement: a
kind or type of judgement is aesthetic if and
only if any instance of that kind must be based on the pleasure or
must be based on the displeasure felt by the
subject in experiencing the object judged. And by judgement Kant means
more than mere belief (which might
be a belief based on another‘s opinion, for instance): he means a
judgement about an item that the subject is
currently aware of, the judgement being based solely on the nature of
the item as it is presented to the subject in
perception or some other form of awareness. He is concerned,
therefore, only with judgements that might be
said to ascribe a positive or negative aesthetic value to an item, and
his conception of an aesthetic judgement
implies that an aesthetic judgement concerns an item‘s capacity,
disposition, or suitability to yield pleasure of
the kind that grounds the judgement, either just to the subject or to
some class of people who satisfy some
requirement of knowledge, experience, morality or whatever. I take his
conception of an aesthetic judgement to
be tantamount to the idea that to experience an item as possessing a
certain (value-laden) aesthetic property—to
̳perceive‘ that property in the item—the perception of the relevant
non-aesthetic property of the item—a
sensory quality, the item‘s perceptual structure, its sheer immensity,
or whatever—must be characterized by the
hedonic response integral to the concept of that aesthetic property.
This might be objected to on the ground that
Kant denies that beauty is a property of an object (and explains why
it might seem as if this is what it must be).
But what his denial comes to is that beauty is not a property of the
appearance of an item, considered in itself,
rather than with respect to the item‘s suitability to yield
disinterested pleasure in the contemplation of its
perceptual form. A judgement that predicates beauty of an item does
not characterize the intrinsic nature of the
item (the item‘s form) in any way at all. Rather, it attributes to the
item‘s form a relation in which this is alleged
to stand to human beings. In other words, for Kant beauty is a certain
kind of relational property of an item,
̳beauty‘ being construed as an affective term, comparable in this
respect to ̳exciting‘, ̳thrilling‘, ̳interesting‘,
̳boring‘, ̳funny‘, ̳disgusting‘, or ̳saddening‘, the affect of
beauty being pleasure. Accordingly, given Kant‘s
understanding of a pure judgement of taste (a judgement of free
beauty), to experience an item as being
beautiful the contemplation of the item‘s form must be experienced
with disinterested pleasure in the perception
of that form (independently of how the item that possesses that form
is conceptualized), and such a judgement
alleges the suitability of an object to yield disinterested pleasure
in the object‘s form to any human being with
normal perceptual capacities—to any human being who is capable of
perceiving that form. Hence, establishing
the credentials of judgements of free beauty to being bona fide
judgements is a matter of showing how a
judgement based on a subject‘s own disinterested pleasure in
something‘s form can rightly lay claim to
universal validity—in Kant‘s language, it is to effect a deduction of
such judgements—and establishing that a
particular judgement of this kind is correct is a matter of
establishing the object‘s suitability to yield this
pleasure to all relevant subjects.
29. From, ―a kind or type of judgement is aesthetic if and only if any
instance of that kind must be based on the
pleasure or must be based on the displeasure felt by the subject in
experiencing the object judged‖ we can
predict that
(1) Judgement – aesthetic = pleasure and displeasure
(2) Judgement – not aesthetic = pleasure
(3) Judgement – aesthetic = pleasure or displeasure
(4) Judgement – not aesthetic = displeasure
30. By, ―by judgement Kant means more than mere belief‖, the author means
(1) Judgement is superior to belief
(2) Judgement is inferior to belief
(3) One can have a belief because of someone else‘s opinion whereas
judgement involves the subject
entertaining a belief and the object of belief directly
(4) One can have a judgement because of someone else‘s opinion whereas
belief involves the subject
entertaining a belief and the object of belief directly
31. According to the passage the word ―affective‖ (2nd half, 2nd
paragraph) is closest in meaning to
(1) Emotional (2) Pleasurable (3) Exciting (4) Effective
32. According to the passage the author is most likely to agree with
(1) Beauty is a matter of personal opinion and tastes
(2) Judgement is bona fide if it is disinterested and induces similar
reaction from other relevant people
(3) Beauty is inherent in the object of perception
(4) Cannot be determined
33. The most suitable title for the passage could be
(1) Aesthetic Judgements
(2) Aesthetic Principles
(3) Aesthetic Properties
(4) Kant and Aesthetic Judgements
Directions for questions 34 to 38: In each of the questions, a word
has been used in sentences in five different
ways. Choose the option corresponding to the sentence in which the
usage of the word is incorrect or
inappropriate.
34. Play
(1) The kids were tired but wanted to continue with the play.
(2) The pitcher was replaced in the fourth inning of play.
(3) We admired his fine play throughout the game.
(4) It was a fountain with a leaping play of water.
35. Stick
(1) The threat of unemployment was the stick that kept the workers
toiling overtime.
(2) Having lived in a large city all his life, he found it hard to
adjust to the sticks.
(3) The old man used his walking stick to shoo away the naughty children.
(4) I will stick to you in sickness and health.
36. Drink
(1) It is a wine that will drink deliciously for many years.
(2) Drink in the liquid and you shall not regret.
(3) He drank in the beauty of the scene.
(4) Drink was his downfall.
37. Pull
(1) He pulled a long face when I reprimanded him.
(2) Do you know what to do when someone pulls a knife on you?
(3) He pulled away the table to make more room for his long legs.
(4) He took a long, thoughtful pull on his pipe.
38. Expand
(1) He hopes to expand his company.
(2) A bird expands its wings.
(3) It will take a lot of time to expand this short story into a novel.
(4) Expand your arms and feel the air
31. According to the passage the word ―affective‖ (2nd half, 2nd
paragraph) is closest in meaning to
(1) Emotional (2) Pleasurable (3) Exciting (4) Effective
32. According to the passage the author is most likely to agree with
(1) Beauty is a matter of personal opinion and tastes
(2) Judgement is bona fide if it is disinterested and induces similar
reaction from other relevant people
(3) Beauty is inherent in the object of perception
(4) Cannot be determined
33. The most suitable title for the passage could be
(1) Aesthetic Judgements
(2) Aesthetic Principles
(3) Aesthetic Properties
(4) Kant and Aesthetic Judgements
Directions for questions 34 to 38: In each of the questions, a word
has been used in sentences in five different
ways. Choose the option corresponding to the sentence in which the
usage of the word is incorrect or
inappropriate.
34. Play
(1) The kids were tired but wanted to continue with the play.
(2) The pitcher was replaced in the fourth inning of play.
(3) We admired his fine play throughout the game.
(4) It was a fountain with a leaping play of water.
35. Stick
(1) The threat of unemployment was the stick that kept the workers
toiling overtime.
(2) Having lived in a large city all his life, he found it hard to
adjust to the sticks.
(3) The old man used his walking stick to shoo away the naughty children.
(4) I will stick to you in sickness and health.
36. Drink
(1) It is a wine that will drink deliciously for many years.
(2) Drink in the liquid and you shall not regret.
(3) He drank in the beauty of the scene.
(4) Drink was his downfall.
37. Pull
(1) He pulled a long face when I reprimanded him.
(2) Do you know what to do when someone pulls a knife on you?
(3) He pulled away the table to make more room for his long legs.
(4) He took a long, thoughtful pull on his pipe.
38. Expand
(1) He hopes to expand his company.
(2) A bird expands its wings.
(3) It will take a lot of time to expand this short story into a novel.
(4) Expand your arms and feel the air
Directions for questions 44 to 48: Each of the following questions has
a paragraph from which the last
sentence has been deleted. From the given options, choose the one that
completes the paragraph in the most
appropriate way
44. We have to recognise that identity cards have a chequered past.
They can be and are used for important but
innocuous purposes like determining whether a person should be behind
the wheels of a car. They have also
however been used for dastardly ends. Identity cards were what enabled
Nazi Germany to single out the Jews.
Information that empowers an individual does also empower a state.
(1) Ultimately therefore what redeems a card is the purpose for which
the state uses it.
(2) Ultimately therefore what redeems a card is the vision and purpose
for which it has been designed.
(3) Ultimately therefore what redeems a card is the vision and purpose
for which it will be used.
(4) Ultimately therefore what redeems a card is keeping the end result in mind.
45. Congress is concerned that domestic limits on carbon emissions
would put American companies at a
competitive disadvantage with rivals in countries with no such caps.
But that is not the only problem. In the
absence of a system of import duties related to carbon, industries
with high emissions might relocate to
nonsignatory countries to save money.
(1) Or they might fail.
(2) Or they might fail, unable to compete with foreigners.
(3) Or they might fail, unable to compete with dirtier and cheaper
foreign rivals.
(4) Or they might fail, unable to get out of the labyrinth.
46. Before the ―Origin,‖ similarities and differences between species
were mere curiosities; questions as to why
a certain plant is succulent like a cactus or deciduous like a maple
could be answered only, ―Because.‖ Biology
itself was nothing more than a vast exercise in catalogue and
description. After the ―Origin,‖ all organisms
became connected, part of the same, profoundly ancient, family tree.
Similarities and differences became
comprehensible and explicable.
(1) In short, Darwin gave us a framework for asking questions about
the natural world, and about ourselves.
(2) Darwin was not right about everything. How could he have been?
(3) So today‘s view of evolution is much more nuanced than Darwin‘s.
(4) The ―Origin,‖ of course, is what Darwin is best known for.
47. Hopefully more and more on the Left will learn these fundamental
lessons. But as important as this debate
is, explaining why elite planning, markets, and local self-sufficiency
are NOT the answers we seek is not my
purpose here. When the Left does learn these lessons - and I do
believe we are slowly learning what will not
work - this will only equip us to win the last war, not the war that
lies ahead. When we finally realize that elite
planning, market socialism, and local self-sufficiency are all
incapable of achieving the historic goals of
socialism, what will be left? The answer is "democratic planning."
(1) It is far from obvious how comprehensive democratic planning
should be organized.
(2) But, besides a catch phrase and a prayer, democratic planning is nonsense.
(3) But, besides a catch phrase and a prayer, what is market socialism?
(4) But, besides a catch phrase and a prayer, what is democratic planning?
Directions for questions 44 to 48: Each of the following questions has
a paragraph from which the last
sentence has been deleted. From the given options, choose the one that
completes the paragraph in the most
appropriate way
44. We have to recognise that identity cards have a chequered past.
They can be and are used for important but
innocuous purposes like determining whether a person should be behind
the wheels of a car. They have also
however been used for dastardly ends. Identity cards were what enabled
Nazi Germany to single out the Jews.
Information that empowers an individual does also empower a state.
(1) Ultimately therefore what redeems a card is the purpose for which
the state uses it.
(2) Ultimately therefore what redeems a card is the vision and purpose
for which it has been designed.
(3) Ultimately therefore what redeems a card is the vision and purpose
for which it will be used.
(4) Ultimately therefore what redeems a card is keeping the end result in mind.
45. Congress is concerned that domestic limits on carbon emissions
would put American companies at a
competitive disadvantage with rivals in countries with no such caps.
But that is not the only problem. In the
absence of a system of import duties related to carbon, industries
with high emissions might relocate to
nonsignatory countries to save money.
(1) Or they might fail.
(2) Or they might fail, unable to compete with foreigners.
(3) Or they might fail, unable to compete with dirtier and cheaper
foreign rivals.
(4) Or they might fail, unable to get out of the labyrinth.
46. Before the ―Origin,‖ similarities and differences between species
were mere curiosities; questions as to why
a certain plant is succulent like a cactus or deciduous like a maple
could be answered only, ―Because.‖ Biology
itself was nothing more than a vast exercise in catalogue and
description. After the ―Origin,‖ all organisms
became connected, part of the same, profoundly ancient, family tree.
Similarities and differences became
comprehensible and explicable.
(1) In short, Darwin gave us a framework for asking questions about
the natural world, and about ourselves.
(2) Darwin was not right about everything. How could he have been?
(3) So today‘s view of evolution is much more nuanced than Darwin‘s.
(4) The ―Origin,‖ of course, is what Darwin is best known for.
47. Hopefully more and more on the Left will learn these fundamental
lessons. But as important as this debate
is, explaining why elite planning, markets, and local self-sufficiency
are NOT the answers we seek is not my
purpose here. When the Left does learn these lessons - and I do
believe we are slowly learning what will not
work - this will only equip us to win the last war, not the war that
lies ahead. When we finally realize that elite
planning, market socialism, and local self-sufficiency are all
incapable of achieving the historic goals of
socialism, what will be left? The answer is "democratic planning."
(1) It is far from obvious how comprehensive democratic planning
should be organized.
(2) But, besides a catch phrase and a prayer, democratic planning is nonsense.
(3) But, besides a catch phrase and a prayer, what is market socialism?
(4) But, besides a catch phrase and a prayer, what is democratic planning?
arise, one concerning the type of judgment,
the other an instance of it. First, there is the question of
establishing the credentials of that kind of judgement to
being a bona fide judgement, a judgement with a well-founded claim to
intersubjective validity, instances of
which can have a genuine truth-value. Secondly, there is the question
of how, if at all, it is possible to establish,
perhaps conclusively, that a particular instance of that kind of
judgement is correct (and in particular, what the
canonical or most fundamental method of doing this is—for there are
usually many methods of establishing the
truth of a judgement). So for aesthetic judgements, or aesthetic
judgements of a particular kind, there is, first, the
issue of establishing the legitimacy of the claim to intersubjective
validity, if such a claim is built into them,
and, second, the issue of showing that, of the opposed aesthetic
judgements that might be made about a certain
thing, this judgement is right, that one wrong.
In the Critique of Aesthetic Judgement Kant‘s leading idea is that an
aesthetic judgement about an item is a
judgement the ̳determining ground‘ of which cannot be other than the
subject‘s pleasure or displeasure in
experiencing the item. In other words, the judgement must be based on
the subject‘s hedonic reaction to the
item. This criterion is intended to apply to kinds of judgement: a
kind or type of judgement is aesthetic if and
only if any instance of that kind must be based on the pleasure or
must be based on the displeasure felt by the
subject in experiencing the object judged. And by judgement Kant means
more than mere belief (which might
be a belief based on another‘s opinion, for instance): he means a
judgement about an item that the subject is
currently aware of, the judgement being based solely on the nature of
the item as it is presented to the subject in
perception or some other form of awareness. He is concerned,
therefore, only with judgements that might be
said to ascribe a positive or negative aesthetic value to an item, and
his conception of an aesthetic judgement
implies that an aesthetic judgement concerns an item‘s capacity,
disposition, or suitability to yield pleasure of
the kind that grounds the judgement, either just to the subject or to
some class of people who satisfy some
requirement of knowledge, experience, morality or whatever. I take his
conception of an aesthetic judgement to
be tantamount to the idea that to experience an item as possessing a
certain (value-laden) aesthetic property—to
̳perceive‘ that property in the item—the perception of the relevant
non-aesthetic property of the item—a
sensory quality, the item‘s perceptual structure, its sheer immensity,
or whatever—must be characterized by the
hedonic response integral to the concept of that aesthetic property.
This might be objected to on the ground that
Kant denies that beauty is a property of an object (and explains why
it might seem as if this is what it must be).
But what his denial comes to is that beauty is not a property of the
appearance of an item, considered in itself,
rather than with respect to the item‘s suitability to yield
disinterested pleasure in the contemplation of its
perceptual form. A judgement that predicates beauty of an item does
not characterize the intrinsic nature of the
item (the item‘s form) in any way at all. Rather, it attributes to the
item‘s form a relation in which this is alleged
to stand to human beings. In other words, for Kant beauty is a certain
kind of relational property of an item,
̳beauty‘ being construed as an affective term, comparable in this
respect to ̳exciting‘, ̳thrilling‘, ̳interesting‘,
̳boring‘, ̳funny‘, ̳disgusting‘, or ̳saddening‘, the affect of
beauty being pleasure. Accordingly, given Kant‘s
understanding of a pure judgement of taste (a judgement of free
beauty), to experience an item as being
beautiful the contemplation of the item‘s form must be experienced
with disinterested pleasure in the perception
of that form (independently of how the item that possesses that form
is conceptualized), and such a judgement
alleges the suitability of an object to yield disinterested pleasure
in the object‘s form to any human being with
normal perceptual capacities—to any human being who is capable of
perceiving that form. Hence, establishing
the credentials of judgements of free beauty to being bona fide
judgements is a matter of showing how a
judgement based on a subject‘s own disinterested pleasure in
something‘s form can rightly lay claim to
universal validity—in Kant‘s language, it is to effect a deduction of
such judgements—and establishing that a
particular judgement of this kind is correct is a matter of
establishing the object‘s suitability to yield this
pleasure to all relevant subjects.
29. From, ―a kind or type of judgement is aesthetic if and only if any
instance of that kind must be based on the
pleasure or must be based on the displeasure felt by the subject in
experiencing the object judged‖ we can
predict that
(1) Judgement – aesthetic = pleasure and displeasure
(2) Judgement – not aesthetic = pleasure
(3) Judgement – aesthetic = pleasure or displeasure
(4) Judgement – not aesthetic = displeasure
30. By, ―by judgement Kant means more than mere belief‖, the author means
(1) Judgement is superior to belief
(2) Judgement is inferior to belief
(3) One can have a belief because of someone else‘s opinion whereas
judgement involves the subject
entertaining a belief and the object of belief directly
(4) One can have a judgement because of someone else‘s opinion whereas
belief involves the subject
entertaining a belief and the object of belief directly
31. According to the passage the word ―affective‖ (2nd half, 2nd
paragraph) is closest in meaning to
(1) Emotional (2) Pleasurable (3) Exciting (4) Effective
32. According to the passage the author is most likely to agree with
(1) Beauty is a matter of personal opinion and tastes
(2) Judgement is bona fide if it is disinterested and induces similar
reaction from other relevant people
(3) Beauty is inherent in the object of perception
(4) Cannot be determined
33. The most suitable title for the passage could be
(1) Aesthetic Judgements
(2) Aesthetic Principles
(3) Aesthetic Properties
(4) Kant and Aesthetic Judgements
Directions for questions 34 to 38: In each of the questions, a word
has been used in sentences in five different
ways. Choose the option corresponding to the sentence in which the
usage of the word is incorrect or
inappropriate.
34. Play
(1) The kids were tired but wanted to continue with the play.
(2) The pitcher was replaced in the fourth inning of play.
(3) We admired his fine play throughout the game.
(4) It was a fountain with a leaping play of water.
35. Stick
(1) The threat of unemployment was the stick that kept the workers
toiling overtime.
(2) Having lived in a large city all his life, he found it hard to
adjust to the sticks.
(3) The old man used his walking stick to shoo away the naughty children.
(4) I will stick to you in sickness and health.
36. Drink
(1) It is a wine that will drink deliciously for many years.
(2) Drink in the liquid and you shall not regret.
(3) He drank in the beauty of the scene.
(4) Drink was his downfall.
37. Pull
(1) He pulled a long face when I reprimanded him.
(2) Do you know what to do when someone pulls a knife on you?
(3) He pulled away the table to make more room for his long legs.
(4) He took a long, thoughtful pull on his pipe.
38. Expand
(1) He hopes to expand his company.
(2) A bird expands its wings.
(3) It will take a lot of time to expand this short story into a novel.
(4) Expand your arms and feel the air
31. According to the passage the word ―affective‖ (2nd half, 2nd
paragraph) is closest in meaning to
(1) Emotional (2) Pleasurable (3) Exciting (4) Effective
32. According to the passage the author is most likely to agree with
(1) Beauty is a matter of personal opinion and tastes
(2) Judgement is bona fide if it is disinterested and induces similar
reaction from other relevant people
(3) Beauty is inherent in the object of perception
(4) Cannot be determined
33. The most suitable title for the passage could be
(1) Aesthetic Judgements
(2) Aesthetic Principles
(3) Aesthetic Properties
(4) Kant and Aesthetic Judgements
Directions for questions 34 to 38: In each of the questions, a word
has been used in sentences in five different
ways. Choose the option corresponding to the sentence in which the
usage of the word is incorrect or
inappropriate.
34. Play
(1) The kids were tired but wanted to continue with the play.
(2) The pitcher was replaced in the fourth inning of play.
(3) We admired his fine play throughout the game.
(4) It was a fountain with a leaping play of water.
35. Stick
(1) The threat of unemployment was the stick that kept the workers
toiling overtime.
(2) Having lived in a large city all his life, he found it hard to
adjust to the sticks.
(3) The old man used his walking stick to shoo away the naughty children.
(4) I will stick to you in sickness and health.
36. Drink
(1) It is a wine that will drink deliciously for many years.
(2) Drink in the liquid and you shall not regret.
(3) He drank in the beauty of the scene.
(4) Drink was his downfall.
37. Pull
(1) He pulled a long face when I reprimanded him.
(2) Do you know what to do when someone pulls a knife on you?
(3) He pulled away the table to make more room for his long legs.
(4) He took a long, thoughtful pull on his pipe.
38. Expand
(1) He hopes to expand his company.
(2) A bird expands its wings.
(3) It will take a lot of time to expand this short story into a novel.
(4) Expand your arms and feel the air
Directions for questions 44 to 48: Each of the following questions has
a paragraph from which the last
sentence has been deleted. From the given options, choose the one that
completes the paragraph in the most
appropriate way
44. We have to recognise that identity cards have a chequered past.
They can be and are used for important but
innocuous purposes like determining whether a person should be behind
the wheels of a car. They have also
however been used for dastardly ends. Identity cards were what enabled
Nazi Germany to single out the Jews.
Information that empowers an individual does also empower a state.
(1) Ultimately therefore what redeems a card is the purpose for which
the state uses it.
(2) Ultimately therefore what redeems a card is the vision and purpose
for which it has been designed.
(3) Ultimately therefore what redeems a card is the vision and purpose
for which it will be used.
(4) Ultimately therefore what redeems a card is keeping the end result in mind.
45. Congress is concerned that domestic limits on carbon emissions
would put American companies at a
competitive disadvantage with rivals in countries with no such caps.
But that is not the only problem. In the
absence of a system of import duties related to carbon, industries
with high emissions might relocate to
nonsignatory countries to save money.
(1) Or they might fail.
(2) Or they might fail, unable to compete with foreigners.
(3) Or they might fail, unable to compete with dirtier and cheaper
foreign rivals.
(4) Or they might fail, unable to get out of the labyrinth.
46. Before the ―Origin,‖ similarities and differences between species
were mere curiosities; questions as to why
a certain plant is succulent like a cactus or deciduous like a maple
could be answered only, ―Because.‖ Biology
itself was nothing more than a vast exercise in catalogue and
description. After the ―Origin,‖ all organisms
became connected, part of the same, profoundly ancient, family tree.
Similarities and differences became
comprehensible and explicable.
(1) In short, Darwin gave us a framework for asking questions about
the natural world, and about ourselves.
(2) Darwin was not right about everything. How could he have been?
(3) So today‘s view of evolution is much more nuanced than Darwin‘s.
(4) The ―Origin,‖ of course, is what Darwin is best known for.
47. Hopefully more and more on the Left will learn these fundamental
lessons. But as important as this debate
is, explaining why elite planning, markets, and local self-sufficiency
are NOT the answers we seek is not my
purpose here. When the Left does learn these lessons - and I do
believe we are slowly learning what will not
work - this will only equip us to win the last war, not the war that
lies ahead. When we finally realize that elite
planning, market socialism, and local self-sufficiency are all
incapable of achieving the historic goals of
socialism, what will be left? The answer is "democratic planning."
(1) It is far from obvious how comprehensive democratic planning
should be organized.
(2) But, besides a catch phrase and a prayer, democratic planning is nonsense.
(3) But, besides a catch phrase and a prayer, what is market socialism?
(4) But, besides a catch phrase and a prayer, what is democratic planning?
Directions for questions 44 to 48: Each of the following questions has
a paragraph from which the last
sentence has been deleted. From the given options, choose the one that
completes the paragraph in the most
appropriate way
44. We have to recognise that identity cards have a chequered past.
They can be and are used for important but
innocuous purposes like determining whether a person should be behind
the wheels of a car. They have also
however been used for dastardly ends. Identity cards were what enabled
Nazi Germany to single out the Jews.
Information that empowers an individual does also empower a state.
(1) Ultimately therefore what redeems a card is the purpose for which
the state uses it.
(2) Ultimately therefore what redeems a card is the vision and purpose
for which it has been designed.
(3) Ultimately therefore what redeems a card is the vision and purpose
for which it will be used.
(4) Ultimately therefore what redeems a card is keeping the end result in mind.
45. Congress is concerned that domestic limits on carbon emissions
would put American companies at a
competitive disadvantage with rivals in countries with no such caps.
But that is not the only problem. In the
absence of a system of import duties related to carbon, industries
with high emissions might relocate to
nonsignatory countries to save money.
(1) Or they might fail.
(2) Or they might fail, unable to compete with foreigners.
(3) Or they might fail, unable to compete with dirtier and cheaper
foreign rivals.
(4) Or they might fail, unable to get out of the labyrinth.
46. Before the ―Origin,‖ similarities and differences between species
were mere curiosities; questions as to why
a certain plant is succulent like a cactus or deciduous like a maple
could be answered only, ―Because.‖ Biology
itself was nothing more than a vast exercise in catalogue and
description. After the ―Origin,‖ all organisms
became connected, part of the same, profoundly ancient, family tree.
Similarities and differences became
comprehensible and explicable.
(1) In short, Darwin gave us a framework for asking questions about
the natural world, and about ourselves.
(2) Darwin was not right about everything. How could he have been?
(3) So today‘s view of evolution is much more nuanced than Darwin‘s.
(4) The ―Origin,‖ of course, is what Darwin is best known for.
47. Hopefully more and more on the Left will learn these fundamental
lessons. But as important as this debate
is, explaining why elite planning, markets, and local self-sufficiency
are NOT the answers we seek is not my
purpose here. When the Left does learn these lessons - and I do
believe we are slowly learning what will not
work - this will only equip us to win the last war, not the war that
lies ahead. When we finally realize that elite
planning, market socialism, and local self-sufficiency are all
incapable of achieving the historic goals of
socialism, what will be left? The answer is "democratic planning."
(1) It is far from obvious how comprehensive democratic planning
should be organized.
(2) But, besides a catch phrase and a prayer, democratic planning is nonsense.
(3) But, besides a catch phrase and a prayer, what is market socialism?
(4) But, besides a catch phrase and a prayer, what is democratic planning?
No comments:
Post a Comment