20. Government official: Clearly, censorship exists if we, as citizens, are not allowed to communicate what we are ready to communicate at our own expense or if other citizens are not permitted access to our communications at their own expense. Public unwillingness to provide funds for certain kinds of scientific, scholarly, or artistic activities cannot, therefore, be described as censorship.
The flawed reasoning in the government officialâ€™s argument is most parallel to that in which one of the following?
(A) All actions that cause unnecessary harm to others are unjust: so if a just action causes harm to others, that action must be necessary.
(B) Since there is more to good manners than simply using polite forms of address, it is not possible to say on first meeting a person whether or not that person has good manners.
(C) Acrophobia, usually defined as a morbid fear of heights, can also mean a morbid fear of sharp objects. Since both fears have the same origin.
(D) There is no doubt that a deed is heroic if the doer risks his or her own life to benefit another person. Thus an action is not heroic if only thing it endangers is the reputation of the doer.
(E) Perception of beauty in an object is determined by past and present influences on the mind of the beholder. Thus on object can be called beautiful, since not everyone will see beauty in it.
Can someone pour in with explanation as mentioned below:
A-> B NOT B -> NOT A
here Public willing (not allowed) => Censorship (Premise)
Public unwilling => Not Censorship.
How above cause effect can be structured inA/B form as explained above
Plz pour in thoughts
Plz Correct me if I am deviating somewhere!!
Consider KUDOS if the post was informative!!