Assertion–Reason (Two Reasons): Assertion (A): “Religion is the opium of the people.” Reason (R1): Opium is soothing. Reason (R2): Religion is good.
-
AIf only reason 1 (R1) and not reason 2 (R2) is the reason for the assertion (A).
-
BIf only reason 2 (R2) and not reason 1 (R1) is the reason for the assertion (A).
-
CIf both (R1) and (R2) are reasons for the assertion (A).
-
DIf neither (R1) nor (R2) is the reason for the assertion (A).
-
EIf (R1) is partly correct and (R2) is partly correct.
Answer
Correct Answer: If only reason 1 (R1) and not reason 2 (R2) is the reason for the assertion (A).
Explanation
Introduction / Context:The assertion paraphrases a famous metaphor likening religion’s social/psychological role to opium’s palliative effects. We must decide which reason best captures that metaphorical linkage.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- (A) Religion functions like “opium” for people.
- (R1) Opium is soothing (palliative, pain-dulling).
- (R2) Religion is good (a moral value claim).
Concept / Approach:The metaphor emphasizes comfort/soothing/escape from hardship—not a moral evaluation. Thus a statement about opium’s palliative feature aligns; a blanket moral valuation does not address the analogy’s mechanism.
Step-by-Step Solution:
1) (R1) captures the operative aspect of the metaphor—soothing or numbing pain (psychological relief).2) (R2) asserts “goodness,” which neither explains the metaphor nor follows from it; the metaphor is descriptive/critical rather than a moral endorsement.3) Therefore only (R1) supports (A).Verification / Alternative check:Readings of the phrase stress relief/escapism elements rather than a moral appraisal.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:(b) elevates an irrelevant moral claim; (c) includes (R2) without justification; (d) denies the aptness of (R1); (e) hedges needlessly.
Common Pitfalls:Confusing descriptive metaphors with moral judgments; reading “opium” as praise.
Final Answer:Option A: Only (R1) explains the assertion.