Creating a law to restrict the personal use of cars and requiring everyone to use public transportation would be as unthinkable as revising the laws of gravity. There are some forces so fundamental that we have no control over them.
What makes this analogy unsound?
1
Societies do have control over the laws they make.
2
Controlling personal car use takes minimal effort.
Rules and laws always have some exceptions.
The correct answer is 2. Controlling personal car use does not necessarily take minimal effort. It could require significant effort and resources to implement and enforce such a law, including the creation of an efficient and accessible public transportation system. This makes the analogy unsound because it assumes that controlling personal car use would be as impossible as revising the laws of gravity, when in reality, it is a matter of social and policy choices that can be implemented with effort and resources.
The correct answer is option 2: Controlling personal car use takes minimal effort.
This analogy is unsound because controlling personal car use is something that societies can actually have control over. Unlike the laws of gravity, which are fundamental and cannot be altered or controlled by humans, societal laws and regulations can be implemented and changed according to the needs and priorities of the community. Therefore, the comparison between restricting car use and revising the laws of gravity is flawed.
Options 1 and 3 are not relevant to the analogy's unsoundness. While societies do have control over the laws they make (option 1), this does not make the analogy unsound. Likewise, the fact that rules and laws always have some exceptions (option 3) does not directly impact the unsoundness of the analogy.
The analogy presented in the question is unsound for several reasons. Let's analyze each option to determine why they are incorrect:
1. Societies do have control over the laws they make.
This option is correct and directly points out the flaw in the analogy. Unlike the laws of gravity, which are natural and cannot be controlled by humans, societies do have control over the laws they create. Laws are human constructs that can be modified, revised, or created based on societal needs and priorities. Therefore, comparing the inability to control the laws of gravity to the creation of laws restricting personal car use is not a valid analogy.
2. Controlling personal car use takes minimal effort.
This option is incorrect. Controlling personal car use does not take minimal effort since it involves various aspects such as policy implementation, infrastructure development, public transportation availability and accessibility, financial investment, and changing people's behavior and habits. It requires a comprehensive and coordinated approach involving government agencies, transportation authorities, and public involvement.
3. Rules and laws always have some exceptions.
This option is correct, but it is not directly relevant to the analogy. It is a general statement about rules and laws, indicating that there are often exceptions or limitations to their application. While this statement is true, it does not address the fundamental flaw in the analogy. The analogy compares the inability to control the laws of gravity to the creation of laws restricting personal car use, which are distinct concepts and not directly related to exceptions in laws.
Therefore, option 1, "Societies do have control over the laws they make," correctly identifies the flaw in the analogy and explains why it is unsound.