Logical reasoning PrepTest 136 · Section 4 · Question 7

Incorrect. Consequences are out of scope of the argument—it only shows up as a background statement that the Philosopher then pivots away from. As such, assumptions about consequences can't be necessary.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen with Necessary Assumption

Stimulus Summary:
not Desire to conform to a principle → not Moral agent
Therefore - Moral agent → Free will

Answer Anticipation:
The first statement here is pretty generic (motivations and consequences are related to morality), and the Philosopher pivots away from it ("Nonetheless"), so we can ignore it as a part of the argument.

Instead, we should focus on what comes after the pivot, where we get a principle/conditional statement ("must") that's supported ("because") by another conditional ("without"). We diagrammed that second statement using "without" as "if not," but if you diagrammed it as the contrapositive using another method, you'd actually be better off! That's because the conclusion features Moral agent as a sufficient condition, and our diagram has it in the premise as a necessary one (albeit negated). So we need to take the contrapositive of that statement to get it to line up with the conclusion:
Moral agent → Desire to conform to a principle

From here, we can see that the premise establishes desiring to conform to a principle as the necessary condition for being a moral agent, but the conclusion is that free will is necessary to be one. Therefore, the argument is jumping from someone desiring to conform to a principle to having free will:
Desire to conform to a principle → Free will

Answer Explanation:
This answer reflects the term shift featured in the argument. If desiring to conform to a principle doesn't require free will, then we can't bridge the gap between the premise and conclusion and the argument falls apart.

Key Takeaway:
While conditional logic is more common in Strengthen with Sufficient Premise questions, it does feature in some Strengthen with Necessary Premise questions. When that happens, you should approach it in largely the same way—diagramming things out, figuring out what terms need to be connecting, and finding the answer that connects them.

Incorrect. Similar to (A), consequences are a part of the background, not the argument itself, so we can eliminate this answer.

Incorrect. This answer is too broad in discussing "desires" instead of just a desire to conform to a principle.

Incorrect. The argument never discusses "morally worthy" actions. The closest it gets is discussing some things that are relevant to the moral worth of an action, but that was a part of the background.