Examkin

Question

Difficulty: HardNecessary Assumption

Philosopher: A genuinely altruistic act requires that the agent act solely for the benefit of another, devoid of any subconscious or conscious anticipation of a personal payoff. Yet, neurological studies demonstrate that when humans assist others in distress, their brains consistently release neurotransmitters that induce a profound sense of psychological well-being. Because humans are neurologically conditioned to expect this internal sensation when performing charitable acts, we must conclude that humans are incapable of genuine altruism.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the philosopher's argument depends?

  1. A
    Every action performed by a human being is motivated, at least in part, by a neurologically conditioned expectation.
  2. B
    The only actions that trigger the release of neurotransmitters inducing psychological well-being are those that assist others in distress.
  3. The internal sensation of psychological well-being induced by neurotransmitter release qualifies as a personal payoff.Answer
  4. D
    A genuinely altruistic act must not result in any positive neurological response for the person performing the action.
  5. E
    An individual performing a charitable act must be consciously aware of their neurological conditioning at the time the act is performed.

Answer

The internal sensation of psychological well-being induced by neurotransmitter release qualifies as a personal payoff.
The argument relies on a subtle shift in terminology. The premises establish that humans expect a 'profound sense of psychological well-being,' but the conclusion claims humans fail the test for altruism because they anticipate a 'personal payoff.' For the conclusion to logically follow, the author must assume that the psychological well-being they expect is, in fact, a form of personal payoff. Logically negating this statement breaks the argument: if the well-being is not a personal payoff, then anticipating it does not disqualify the act from being genuinely altruistic.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the argument's structure to identify the main conclusion and the premises supporting it.
Conclusion: Humans are incapable of genuine altruism. Premises: Altruism requires no anticipation of a personal payoff. Humans are neurologically conditioned to expect psychological well-being when helping others.
Deconstructing the argument is necessary to spot logical gaps between the provided evidence and the final conclusion.
2
Identify the logical gap or concept shift between the premises and the conclusion.
The premises discuss the expectation of 'psychological well-being', but the conclusion relies on the condition of anticipating a 'personal payoff'.
In necessary assumption questions, subtle changes in terminology often indicate the unstated premise that the author is taking for granted.
3
Apply the Negation Test to candidate answers to see which one destroys the argument when logically negated.
Negating the correct statement yields: 'Psychological well-being does NOT qualify as a personal payoff.' If this is true, expecting well-being does not violate the rule against expecting a payoff, and the argument collapses.
The Negation Test is the definitive method for confirming whether an assumption is strictly necessary for the conclusion to follow.

Key Concept

Identifying a bridge assumption that connects the specific evidence provided in the premises to the shifted language of the conclusion.
Estimated Time:2m 0s
Rate this question

Topics

Necessary Assumption

More questions from this topic