Dec 2009 2 15

lily88888UID: 2828533

15. Bowers: A few theorists hold the extreme view that

society could flourish in a condition of anarchy, the

absence of government. Some of these theorists

have even produced interesting arguments to

support that position. One writer, for example,

contends that anarchy is laissez-faire capitalism

taken to its logical extreme. But these theorists'

views ignore the fundamental principle of social

philosophy-that an acceptable social philosophy

must promote peace and order. Any social

philosophy that countenances chaos, i.e., anarchy,

accordingly deserves no further attention.

The reasoning in Bowers's argument is most vulnerable

to criticism on the grounds that

(A) the meaning of a key term shifts illicitly during

the course of the argument

(B) the argument fails to show that laissez-faire

capitalism deserves to be rejected as a social

philosophy

(C) the truth or falsity of a view is not determined

by the number of people who accept it as. true

(D) the argument presumes, without providing

justification, that any peaceful society will

flourish

(E) it is unreasonable to reject a view merely

because it can be described as extreme

The answer is A. I picked A. I guess the person shifted the meaning of chaos or order. But I am not sure.

duijinxiaoziUID: 2585955

（1）anarchy, the absence of government.
（2）Any social philosophy that countenances chaos, i.e., anarchy.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Absence of government" is not equal to  "philosophy that countenances chaos".
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anarchy:
"A social state in which there is no governing person or group of people, but each individual has absolute liberty (without the implication of disorder.) But is bound by a social code ."

ltx525UID: 2323504

I think it's D

lily88888UID: 2828533

The answer is A. Tim explained it.

lily88888UID: 2828533

Ltx525: Welcome to discussion!