Please enter the following details
Read the following passage and answer the THREE questions that follow.
What I call fast political thinking is driven by simplified moral frames. These moral frames give us the sense that those who agree with us have the right answer, while those who disagree are unreasonable, or worse.
Each moral frame sets up an axis of favorable and unfavorable. Progressives use the oppressor-oppressed axis. Progressives view most favorably those groups that can be regarded as oppressed or standing with the oppressed, and they view most unfavorably those groups that can be regarded as oppressors. Conservatives use the civilization-barbarism axis. Conservatives view most favorably the institutions that they believe constrain and guide people toward civilized behavior, and they view most unfavorably those people who they see as trying to tear down such institutions. Libertarians use the liberty-coercion axis. Libertarians view most favorably those people who defer to decisions that are made on the basis of personal choice and voluntary agreement, and they view most unfavorably those people who favor government interventions that restrict personal choice.
If you have a dominant axis, I suggest that you try to learn the languages spoken by those who use the other axes. Don’t worry—learning other languages won’t make it easy for others to convert you to their point of view. By the same token, it will not make it easy to convert others to your point of view. However, you may become aware of assumptions your side makes that others might legitimately question.
What learning the other languages can do is enable you to understand how others think about political issues. Instead of resorting to the theory that people with other views are crazy or stupid or evil, you may concede that they have a coherent point of view. In fact, their point of view could be just as coherent as yours. The problem is that those people apply their point of view in circumstances where you are fairly sure that it is not really appropriate.
Consider that there may be situations in which one frame describes the problem much better than the others. For example, I believe that the civil rights movement in the United States is best described using the progressive heuristic of the oppressed and the oppressor. In the 1950s and the early 1960s, the people who had the right model were the people who were fighting for black Americans to have true voting rights, equal access to housing, and an end to the Jim Crow laws. The civilization-barbarism axis and the liberty-coercion axis did not provide the best insight into
the issue….
Option B best explains the author’s use of the term “moral frames:“The frames define what the believer believes as right or wrong.
According to the passage, moral frames are simplified perspectives that people use to interpret political issues. Based on the axis of the frame (oppressor-oppressed, civilization-barbarism, or liberty-coercion), they create a sense of right and wrong, favourable and unfavourable. These frames guide the believer’s views and judgments about different groups and issues.
Option A is incorrect because the passage doesn’t suggest that moral frames give believers the right to question others’ behaviours.
Option C is not correct, as the passage clearly explains the concept of moral frames, indicating they can be rationally explained.
Option D is incorrect because the passage doesn’t state that what is right to the believer is wrong to those who do not share that belief.
Option E is incorrect because the passage doesn’t suggest that moral frames make it easy for the believer to declare others as wrong.
Create a FREE account and get:
- All Quant Formulas and shortcuts PDF
- 15 XAT previous papers with solutions PDF
- XAT Trial Classes for FREE
