Social Science (087) — AI-generated practice question

The elders' position is better supported by prudential reasoning for power sharing.

Prudential reasoning means avoiding outcomes that are harmful, not just doing what is morally right. Lebanon experienced a devastating civil war due to inter-community conflict. The power-sharing arrangement — fixing top posts for different religious communities — ensures no single community dominates, preventing renewed violence.

Khalil's open-election system risks permanent majority rule by one community, which the textbook warns against: "rule by majority must not become rule by majority community." The elders' system guarantees every community a stake in government, making it the more prudent choice for maintaining peace.

Source: Chapter 1 (Khalil's Dilemma); Chapter 5 (Accommodation of Social Diversity)

---

• Prudential vs. moral reasoning: Examiners expect you to use this distinction. Prudential = practical, harm-avoiding; moral = right/wrong in principle. Khalil uses moral reasoning (fairness); the elders use prudential reasoning (avoiding civil war).
• Key textbook point: Majority rule must not become permanent dominance by one religious/ethnic group — cite this directly.
• Lebanon context: The civil war and the post-war power-sharing pact are the factual basis of your answer.
• Don't just describe the system — explicitly state why it qualifies as prudential reasoning.