Which of the Following Best Explains Why Drawing Analogies Between

question 13

Multiple Choice

Which of the following best explains why drawing analogies between two actions can lead to a particular moral conclusion about one of them?

• A) People must be able to depend on others' consistent judgment from one case to the next, and so it is important not to change your mind about your moral judgments.
• B) Because, as the American philosopher Ralph Waldo Emerson said, "consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."
• C) If two things are similar enough in nonmoral ways, then it would be inconsistent or even hypocritical to make different moral judgments about them.
• D) By provoking moral intuitions related to one action, the argument can provoke similar moral intuitions about the second action.

---

Definitions:

Affirmative Defense

A defense in which the defendant introduces evidence to negate or reduce liability, rather than simply denying the plaintiff's allegations.

Answer

A defendant’s response to a plaintiff’s complaint.

Cross-Claim

A claim brought against a co-party in the same side of a legal action, asserting wrongdoing that contributed to the original lawsuit.

Counterclaim

A claim made by a defendant against a plaintiff in a legal proceeding.