What is the main conclusion?
It is tempting to say that all politicians lie and so none can be blamed. This is a convenient piece of cynicism. If every politician lies, then the voter has no way of distinguishing between a stretched statistic and a fabricated claim. Yet the difference matters. A politician who emphasises favourable facts and omits the rest is behaving as every advocate does; one who asserts what he knows to be false is damaging the shared record on which debate depends. The first deserves scrutiny; the second deserves penalty. By lumping the two together, cynics lighten the burden on the second kind, who would be delighted to be told that nothing can be done.
Answer and explanation
Correct answer: E. Treating all political dishonesty as equal is mistaken and benefits the worst offenders
- Step 1: The passage argues that selective emphasis and fabrication are different and the cynical view blurs them.
- Step 2: The last sentence says that helps the fabricators.
Answer
Treating all political dishonesty as equal is mistaken and benefits the worst offenders.
Why not the others: The author says selective emphasis deserves scrutiny, not penalty, and does not claim that voters or advocates cannot be trusted.
Practise more Political ethics.
Free questions with an explanation for every one, and full timed LNAT mock tests.