Linked Question
Five jumbled sentences (labelled 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5), related to a topic, are given below. Four of them can be put together to form a coherent paragraph. Identify the odd sentence out and key in the number of that sentence as your answer.
1. The autonomous individual who deliberates, chooses, and acts does not exist prior to the community that shaped the language, concepts, and normative frameworks through which deliberation is made possible. 2. The obligations that arise from this social constitution are not external impositions on a pre-formed self but rather constitutive elements of the self that is doing the deliberating. 3. Collective obligations, symmetrically, are not unlimited: they extend as far as the maintenance of the conditions for autonomous life and no further. 4. A person's capacity for rational agency is not a natural endowment independent of social context; it is cultivated through education, embedded in relationships, and sustained by institutions that require collective maintenance. 5. The case against giving individual autonomy lexical priority over collective obligations begins with an observation about the social constitution of selfhood.
Answer: 3
These sentences build a single argument against giving individual autonomy priority over collective obligations. Sentence 5 opens it: the case begins with an observation about the social constitution of selfhood. Sentence 1 develops that — the deliberating individual does not exist before the community that gave it language and concepts. Sentence 4 extends the same point: the capacity for rational agency is not natural but cultivated through education, relationships, and institutions. Sentence 2 then draws the conclusion: the obligations arising from this social constitution are not external impositions but constitutive parts of the self.
Sentence 3 is the odd one. It places a limit on collective obligations — they extend only as far as maintaining the conditions for autonomous life "and no further." That is a qualification running in the opposite direction from the social-constitution thread the other four build; it restricts obligations rather than grounding them in the social self.
Sentence 2 is the closest contender, but it directly continues the constitution argument of 1 and 4, so it fits. Sentence 3's limiting move is the tangent.