Question:

‘In 399 BC, a jury in Athens condemned Socrates to death for impiety and corrupting the morals of the youth...’ Which one of the following claims constitutes the most plausible challenge to Socrates’ argument?

Show Hint

Target the core assumption of an argument to construct the strongest challenge.
Updated On: Aug 11, 2025
  • Long residence only commits someone to obeying just laws and Socrates was convicted under an unjust law.
  • Long residence by itself does not imply a commitment to obeying laws since one never made any explicit commitment.
  • Obedience to the law is not always required.
  • There is no point in escaping from prison since one will anyway be captured again.
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is B

Solution and Explanation

Step 1: Analyze Socrates' Argument He claims that because he has lived in Athens for a long time, he is implicitly committed to obey its laws — even if they are unjust. Step 2: What is being challenged? We must challenge the assumption that residence = agreement to law. That’s the key claim. Option Analysis:

(a) Talks about just vs. unjust laws, but doesn’t deny the commitment itself.
(b) Directly challenges the link between long residence and law commitment — strongest counter. Correct.
(c) Vague general statement — doesn’t target Socrates’ rationale.
(d) Irrelevant — talks about consequences of escape, not moral reasoning.

% Final Answer \[ \boxed{\text{Long residence by itself does not imply a commitment to obeying laws...}} \]
Was this answer helpful?
0
0

Top Questions on Verbal Reasoning

View More Questions

Questions Asked in CLAT exam

View More Questions