Mike: Tom did not tell me that I could use his computer, but it would not be wrong for me to use it anyway. Last week...

MACZ on December 23, 2019

I can't see how any of these principles would apply to Mike in this situation. Could someone expalin why D would work?

Mike decided that it was wrong to use Tom's computer without his permission but Tom used Mary's bicycle when she said he couldn't. If we are following the principle that "It is permissible to treat people in a way that is similar to the way in which they have treated others." (D) then it would only justify Mary in using Tom's computer without his permission. This is not mentioned in the stimulus though. Tom used Mary's bicylcle without her permission but Mike decides not to use Tom's computer because it would be wrong. Isn't this completely contradictary from the answer? If Mike treated Tom according to our principle in D then he would've used his computer without permission because thats what he did to Mary in the example. Let me know where I am off in my line of thinking. Thanks

Create a free account to read and take part in forum discussions.

Already have an account? log in

Annie on December 24, 2019


I think you may have been tripped by the odd-phrasing of this question. Mike actually decides that "it would NOT be wrong" for him to use Tom's computer. This means he decided that it would be okay for him to use Tom's computer.

So, you have two examples of people (Mike and Tom) using other people's things when they had not been given permission by the owner (Tom and Mary).

Answer (D) is correct because it explains this pattern. It is okay for Mike to use Tom's computer without permission, because Tom used Mary's bicycle without permission. This is explainable by the principle that you can treat people in the way they've treated others.