medium · MCAT cars

Passage: "Critics of the precautionary principle charge that it is self-defeating: by demanding we forgo any action whose harms cannot be ruled out, it would forbid the very precautions it recommends, since those too carry unruled-out harms. The charge has force only against a caricature. A defensible precautionary principle is not a rule about acts in isolation but about the comparison of options under uncertainty; it counsels favoring the option whose worst credible outcome is least bad. So understood, it cannot paralyze, for inaction is itself an option to be ranked, and refusing a precaution is not exempt from the same scrutiny it imposes on action. The critics' objection succeeds, in short, only by assuming the asymmetry—action scrutinized, inaction privileged—that the principle exists to deny." The author's rebuttal of the critics depends most heavily on which of the following assumptions?

1. Declining to act is itself a choice that can and must be evaluated by the same standard applied to acting
2. The worst credible outcome of any precaution can always be estimated with enough precision to rank it
3. Harms that cannot be ruled out should be weighted more heavily than harms that are merely possible
4. The precautionary principle was originally formulated as a comparative rather than an absolute rule

Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →