Question

Statement: James is a human rights activist who was fined £60 on three different days during the past month for smoking in public at his workplace. On each of the occasions, he admitted to the act peacefully, telling policemen that he is unwilling to conform to such a breach of people's right to privacy. James paid the three fines shortly after receiving them. Inference: James has spent at least a couple of hundred pounds in his struggle to oppose the violation of civil liberties this year.

A. True
B. Probably True
C. Insufficient Data
D. Probably False
E. False

Answer 1

The inference that James spent at least a couple of hundred pounds is false, based on the information provided. The fines totaled £180, and there's no data about other expenses. This reflects the concept of civil disobedience, a nonviolent resistance method famously endorsed by figures like Henry David Thoreau.

Step-by-step explanation:

The statement about James being a human rights activist fined for smoking in public suggests he has incurred a total of £180 in fines (£60 on three different days). The inference that he has spent at least a couple of hundred pounds this year on his struggle is therefore false, assuming that the only expenses incurred were the three fines.

Furthermore, without additional data about any other expenses he may have undertaken in support of his cause, we cannot conclude with certainty that he has surpassed the £200 mark. This scenario resonates with the concept of civil disobedience, famously practiced and advocated by Henry David Thoreau, who chose to go to jail rather than pay taxes that funded causes he did not support. Similarly, King James I of England expressed negative opinions towards tobacco smoking back in 1604. The act of civil disobedience is historically a means to oppose government actions by nonviolent resistance, often involving a willingness to accept the consequences.