Shanna: Owners of any work of art, simply by virtue of ownership, ethically have the right to destroy that artwork if...

Hey folks. I struggled with choosing between two answers. One was wrong, the one about the rights of future generations to their heritage superseding any present individual’s rights, and one was right, the one about the rights of ownership not being absolute. I chose the wrong one because it more closely echoed the language in the stimulus. It seemed more topical. I understand that looking for the answer in a Principle question generally involves a single clearly correct answer, so that’s a sign that I am approaching this the wrong way. I chose the wrong answer because it appealed directly to a piece of the stimulus: the rights of posterity to aesthetically valuable things. I can see why the right answer is stronger, but I don’t think stronger makes it right. How would you try to distinguish between these two, and where did my thinking go wrong? Thank you! @ravir