Statement–Assumption — “Feelings of mutual respect among communities are the ultimate safeguard. Once that respect goes, no Constitution can substitute for it.” Assumptions: I. Mutual respect is a social virtue that a Constitution cannot itself manufacture. II. Law cannot be expected to ensure goodwill and harmony among citizens on its own.
Correct Answer: if both I and II is implicit.
Introduction / Context:The statement contrasts organic social virtues (mutual respect) with formal legal frameworks (Constitution). It claims that law cannot replace lost civic goodwill. We must detect the necessary premises.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- Civic harmony arises from attitudes and norms, not only statutes.
- Legal texts can set rights/obligations but cannot alone produce interpersonal respect.
Concept / Approach:Bearing the claim “no Constitution can substitute,” two assumptions are embedded: (I) the virtue in question is not something a Constitution can directly create; (II) therefore, expecting law alone to ensure goodwill is unrealistic. Both are necessary to sustain the contrast and the normative warning.
Step-by-Step Solution:1) I is implicit: if law could itself generate the virtue, substitution would be possible.2) II is implicit: the statement denies legal sufficiency for social harmony absent respect.
Verification / Alternative check:Political theory distinguishes “law on the books” from “norms in practice”; the latter require culture, education, and leadership beyond constitutions.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:Picking only one weakens the contrast; “neither” contradicts the statement’s core message.
Common Pitfalls:Assuming enforceability equals social internalization of values.
Final Answer:if both I and II is implicit.