Some writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave l

Hi asadsurmawala, rahulkashyap
here is the answer for Q2. sahilchaudhary, workout, please correct if i have misinterpreted the meaning.

2. The author concluded in the passage that the essential purpose of government is protection of property. In doing so the author assumes that:
I. there actually existed a time in which the disparity between an individual‘s needs and wants motivated cooperation, and not transgressions against property.
II. the part of property surrendered to establish some form of government is less than that which would be lost if it were left unprotected.
III. the moral laxity resulting from reduction in hardship results in acts against property, rather than failure to assist those experiencing disease or misfortune.

A. I, II, and III
B. II and III only
C. I and II only
D. I and III only
E. II only

THE QUESTION TALKS ABOUT AN OUTCOME: the essential purpose of government is protection of property. AND WE NEED TO FIND ASSUMPTIONS THAT SUPPORT THIS OUTCOME. Let's look at each option.
The option I points to para 2 :
In this state of natural liberty, a thousand motives will excite them to society: the strength of one is so unequal to his wants, and his mind so unfitted for perpetual solitude, that he is soon obliged [u]to seek assistance and relief from another, who in turn requires the same.[/u]

rather than understanding entire para, let's look at answer choices and map those with above para.
Opion I. there actually existed a time in which the disparity between an individual‘s needs and wants motivated cooperation, and not transgressions against property.
How to interpret:
In simple terms, when we get complete freedom, we want to perform many (good) things for our society. when we have freedom, our mind doesn't seek solitude/loneliness, rather, we want to meet with few other members and seek assistance/ help each other.
a more practical example -- when you join university for post graduation, you have full freedom to choose your subjects, you have full freedom to innovate and make things better. In such cases, do we opt to just sit alone in library OR in our dorm room? No, right? we make friends, we meet more ppl/faculty members and we try to help each other, we learn from each other, right? that's the same concept explained here.
Option further says -->not transgressions against property --> this means: we don't commit any crime or offence. The para doesn't say anything like this. the para/author says, we seek assistance / help.
SO OPTION I ACTS AS AN ASSUMPTION that supports the conclusion.

Option II. the part of property surrendered to establish some form of government is less than that which would be lost if it were left unprotected.
How to interpret:
Let's look at para 3 -->
As time passes, however, in proportion as they surmount their early difficulties, the people will inevitably relax in their duty and attachment to each other; and this laxity will point out the necessity for each to surrender a part of his property in order to establish some form of government to protect the rest. Here then is the origin of government: the inability of moral virtue to govern the world; here, too, is the design and end of government: freedom and security.

as highlighted above: the thrid para doesn't compare the two option. The para only says that once a person is tired --> he / she prefers giving a part of property so that rest can be protected. The para doesn't compare the action of "giving part of property so that you still own something " VS "not surrendering and leaving the property unprotected".
HENCE OPTION II is NOT THE ASSUMPTION.


Option III. the moral laxity resulting from reduction in hardship results in acts against property, rather than failure to assist those experiencing disease or misfortune.

Let's look at para 3 -->
1) Four or five united in a society would be able to raise a dwelling, but one might labour out the period of life without accomplishing anything. 2) Disease or misfortune could soon reduce an individual to a state in which he could easily perish. 3) As time passes, however, in proportion as they surmount their early difficulties, the people will inevitably relax in their duty and attachment to each other; and this laxity will point out the necessity for each to surrender a part of his property in order to establish some form of government to protect the rest.

How to interpret:
1) Author says that 4 to 5 members in a society perform a great hardwork (labour) through out entire life but they don't succeed. They don't achieve anything.
2) Sometimes, Due to illness (disease) or due to misfortune, they tend to feel perished (sudden dealth/pain/fall/expire).
3) Over a period of time, some people surpass these difficulties. but as they grow older, they can't keep up with constant struggle/hardship. So they give up on their duties (relax) and also relations. for more clarity --> imagine our grandparents or great grand parents. During their young age, they worked really hard, but as they grew older, they naturally couldn't continue working. They retired. It's natural that they let their children take care of themselves. In doing so, sometimes, our great grand parents gave away some part of land or any other valueable items/assets to their generation (children etc).

This is exactly given in the Option 3. As ppl grew older, due to moral obligations they preferred giving part of property/assets to others. These members didn't fight to hold on to the property. They shared it with rest so that everyone is protected/benefited. As essentially, this forms the basis for forming a government.
Again, the second part of the option III --> "rather than failure to assist those experiencing disease or misfortune" --> aligns with above point. Notice that how, author uses point 2) given above.

Author says that giving part of land is a moral duty and should not be interpreted as a failure to assist less fortunate.

SO OPTION III ACTS AS AN ASSUMPTION that supports the conclusion.

If we combine all these, answer is D. I and III only

---
Please give Kudos even if you disagree.