Suppose I have promised to keep a confidence and someone asks me a question that I cannot answer truthfully without thereby breaking the promise. Obviously, I cannot both keep and break the same promise. Therefore, one cannot be obliged both to answer all questions truthfully and to keep all promises.
Which one of the following arguments is most similar in its reasoning to the argument above?
(A) It is claimed that we have the unencumbered right to say whatever we want. It is also claimed that we have the obligation to be civil to others. But civility requires that we not always say what we want. So, it cannot be true both that we have the unencumbered right to say whatever we want and that we have the duty to be civil.
(B) Some politicians could attain popularity with voters only by making extravagant promises; this, however, would deceive the people. So, since the only way for some politicians to be popular is to deceive, and any politician needs to be popular, it follows that some politicians must deceive.
(C) If we put a lot of effort into making this report look good, the client might think we did so because we believed our proposal would not stand on its own merits. On the other hand, if we do not try to make the report look good, the client might think we are not serious about her business. So, whatever we do, we risk her criticism.
(D) If creditors have legitimate claims against a business and the business has the resources to pay those debts, then the business is obliged to pay them. Also, if a business has obligations to pay debts, then a court will force it to pay them. But the courts did not force this business to pay its debts, so either the creditors did not have legitimate claims or the business did not have sufficient resources.
(E) If we extend our business hours, we will either have to hire new employees or have existing employees work overtime. But both new employees and additional overtime would dramatically increase our labor costs. We cannot afford to increase labor costs, so we will have to keep our business hours as they stand.
A. Correct. This matches the argument in the stimulus. It highlights a genuine contradiction: one cannot both speak freely without restraint and always remain civil. The two ideas are fundamentally incompatible.
B. Incorrect. While you might assume someone has the right to speak but simply chooses not to use it, that’s not what this choice is saying. “Unencumbered” means there are no barriers. If civility prevents you from speaking, then your right is in fact limited—so the contradiction still exists.
C. Incorrect. This is a flawed comparison. Politicians still have the option to not pursue popularity or even to not be politicians. The argument here doesn’t present an actual contradiction—just a strategic choice.
D. Incorrect. Rather than highlighting a conflict between two ideas, this choice simply outlines risks associated with two separate actions. There’s no internal contradiction involved.
E. Incorrect. This argument misleads by using two different interpretations of “will force.” In one sense, it implies that courts actively enforce debt repayment, but courts only do so when a case is brought before them. There's an unstated third possibility—that creditors didn’t take the matter to court—so the contradiction falls apart.
