The author cites this example in order to show a case in which non exclusion may do more harm than good (e.g. by undermining the trust that a person would have in a social worker).
B is wrong because this is the author's objection to Bentham's general principle, not to the specific reform he proposed. The author is not questioning Bentham's reform (letting people testify about cases they are a party to), but the general idea (non exclusion) that underlies it.
E is wrong because we are not trying to show that there are many different exceptions, but that there are some exceptions. There is nothing in the passage that would suggest that there are a wide range of situations that are exceptions. Both exceptions cited are conversations between people who have a strong bond of trust.
MazenJuly 28, 2022
Hi Emil,
I understood your explanation for eliminating E. But I'm having hard time understanding your explanation of B.
I'm sorry, but maybe you can please elaborate on B.
Respectfully,
Mazen
MazenJuly 28, 2022
Hi Emil,
I am a big believer in doing the mental heavy lifting if I were to advance intellectually. And I have reflected on B since my first post.
Is it risky to eliminate B using the following approach: the word "objection" in B is too strong for the author's pertinent textual statements in the passages.
Also answer-choice A is weak and hence easily supportable by the language of the passage.
Finally, maybe this question one of those that we cannot just pick and move on before we gave all five choices a once over.
