逻辑题 请教大家~~~谢谢

Sophin

Legal theorist: It is unreasonable to incarcerate anyone for any other reason than that he or she is a serious threat to the property or lives of other people. The breaking of a law does not justify incarceration, for lawbreaking proceeds either from ignorance of the law or of the effects of one’s actions, or from the free choice of the lawbreaker. Obviously mere ignorance cannot justify incarcerating a lawbreaker, and even free choice on the part of the lawbreaker fails to justify incarceration, for free choice proceeds from the desires of an agent, and the desires of an agent are products of genetics and environmental conditioning, neither of which is controlled by the agent

The claim in the first sentence of the passage plays which one of the following roles in the argument
(A) It is offered as a premise that helps to show that no actions are under the control of the agent

(B) It is offered as background information necessary to understand the argument

(C) It is offered as the main conclusion that the argument is designed to establish

(D) It is offered as evidence for the stated claim that protection of life and property is more important than retribution for past illegal acts

(E) It is offered as evidence for the stated claim that lawbreaking proceeds from either ignorance of the law, or ignorance of the effects of one’s actions, or free choice

答案是C，请教各位，如果这句话是结论的话，应该从哪里看出来that he or she is a serious threat to the property or lives of other people这个点，我觉得后面一直在说不应该incarceration的三个原因，和威胁到别人的生命和财产安全扯不上关系。。。拜托各位分析一下~~~~谢谢！

沫澧

貌似是  比较顺的逻辑是
law breaking有3个原因，ignorance，the effects of one’s actions，和free choice
然后论证了由ignorance和free choice引起的违法是不应该被下狱的
也就是说三个原因中只有 the effects of one’s actions，并且这种effect是到了
he or she is a serious threat to the property or lives of other people这种程度才应该被下狱

第一句就是最后这个结论。。。
我是这么想的哈。。。不知道对不对

终于悲催了

It is unreasonable to incarcerate anyone for any other reason than
这个是结论~
that只是在引导一个解释reason的从句，没有用的喵~

Sophin

............