Q19

[AbrahamS97]

I picked answer choice E. Perhaps this was out of some familiarity and respect for David Hume, but I also believe it makes the most sense. The correct answer, B, states that invoking Hume adds credence to theory of soft determinism. How does simply mentioning that he had a similar view on determinism do this? But specifically, why is E wrong?

Thanks.

[ohthatpatrick]

Namedropping Hume, for the sake of saying "this idea has been around for a while now, is primarily to show that Ayer isn't a lone wolf with some kooky idea.

Line 29-31 claims that the idea that "determinism can coexist with free will" has "long been argued". So bringing up Hume is supporting that claim.

(B) and (E) are the same in terms of
"add credence" or "add intellectual respectability"
so they diverge based on the second half

Are we talking about
"the theory of soft determinism"
or
"people who think the brain should not be described mechanistically"

P2 in psg B is talking about the theory of soft determinism, which thinks that a mechanistic description of the brain is compatible with the notion of free will.

That's why (B) is better than (E). Neither Ayer nor Hume are accused of arguing that the brain should not be described mechanistically.

Hope this helps.

[JasonB370]

I get that he is citing Hume to bolster Ayer's credibility, which does add credence to the theory of SD, but isn't this quite literally done by the process of (A): characterizing Ayer as someone who is not an original thinker?

[ohthatpatrick]

Saying that someone "is not an original thinker" is an insult.
It sounds like you're saying, "he's never come up with any good ideas of his own."

Do you think that the author is attempting to insult Ayer at that point in the passage?
Probably not.

I think you're just not hearing the difference between the neutral sense of, "he's not the first to have had this thought" and the more accusatory "he is not an original thinker".

Hope this helps.