This is the problem with citizens being genuinely happy.
I marked the conclusion of this argument being "But this is a clearly a bad principle if the goal is a society whose citizens are genuinely happy."
I dismissed answer choice E for sure, but every other one I kept as contenders. I negated each one in my head, but nothing seemed to destroy the conclusion. I just could not fully understand what was going on here although I can easily diagram what is going on.
A premise in the argument is:
~Pursuing personal excellence AND ~ Willing to undergo personal change ---> ~Genuinely Happy
Thus,
Genuinely Happy ---> Pursuing personal excellence or willing to undergo personal change (or both of course).
The negation of the correct answer (B): People who are not dissatisfied with themselves are NOT less likely than others to pursue personal excellence.
Woohoo? Who cares who is more or less likely to pursue personal excellence. How is this effecting our conclusion. It is not.
PT 36: Section 3, LR, #18, Necessary Assumption question Forum
-
- Posts: 209
- Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2011 11:26 pm
-
- Posts: 209
- Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2011 11:26 pm
Re: PT 36: Section 3, LR, #18, Necessary Assumption question
Also, does "not dissatisfied" = satisfied?
Is there a middle ground between dissatisfaction and satisfaction?
Do you really have to be one or the other?
Is there a middle ground between dissatisfaction and satisfaction?
Do you really have to be one or the other?