Which example would best satisfy the critic's burden as the author describes it?
Defenders of old customs often say that a practice's age is itself a reason to keep it: it has survived because it works, and people are attached to it. There is something in this. Customs embody lessons that no individual could rediscover in a lifetime, and they give communities a shared identity. But survival is not proof of goodness. Many practices survived for centuries because those who suffered under them had no voice. A tradition should therefore be given a presumption in its favour, not immunity. The presumption can be overturned by showing that it causes serious harm, but the burden is on the critic, and the critic should show the harm and not merely say that the practice is old-fashioned.
Answer and explanation
Correct answer: C. Evidence that a long-standing custom regularly causes serious injury to those who take part
- Step 1: The author requires the critic to show harm, not merely age or being old-fashioned.
- Step 2: This evidence points to "Evidence that a long-standing custom regularly causes serious injury to those who take part".
Answer
Evidence that a long-standing custom regularly causes serious injury to those who take part.
Why not the others: Unfashionableness, origins, being out of date and unknown origins do not show harm.
Practise more Tradition and ethics.
Free questions with an explanation for every one, and full timed LNAT mock tests.