Talisse and Berlin
Talisse considers Berlin first, on page 131 in the text . The syllogistic summary of the argument is as
1. All human beings must make choices among competing, incommensurable goods
2. But choices among competing, incommensurable goods should always be made freely (i.e., in
accordance with the value of freedom)
3. All humans should always be free to choose between competing, incommensurable goods.
4. But the only regime which allows human beings to freely choose between competing
incommensurable goods is a liberal one
5. All human beings should live in a liberal regime
Copy the syllogism on to your paper. Identify where the error(s) in the argument occur. Remember that
the error could be a faulty premise, a faulty inference, or both. Explain in your own words what you
think the error is.
Talisse and Galston
The second argument comes from William Galston (p132) . . . Summarizing syllogistically:
1. Value pluralism necessarily makes imposing a particular WOL unreasonable
2. The only political theory that avoids imposing a WOL is liberalism
3. Value pluralism necessarily implies liberalism.
Do the same thing for this argument as you did for the first.