Question 1
Answer: D
In this piece, we are told that there are two possible links between morality and fairness. Firstly the 'interchangeability' view that fairness is just another may of expressing morality and secondly, the view that fairness is based on morality, which is something distinct. We are also told that the 'interchangeability' view does not work: "there is an obvious issue with this argument", so B cannot be right.
We can also strike off E: the author clearly thinks there is a link between morality and fairness: "Fairness seems to have a considerable relationship with morality".
The preferred view, then, is that fairness is based on morality, which is a distinct concept based on something else. This is not majoritarianism, as the author asks: "why does a simple majority hold sway in the first place?", and answers it with inherent moral considerations.
So, is morality based on the value of human life? It is a possibility which is suggested in the fifth paragraph. However, this is deemed an "intangible sentiment". The author also says that "fool-proof explanations for morality and its counterparts cannot be readily fashioned". Therefore, C is incorrect and we are left with D, which works perfectly with the lack of fool-proof explanation for morality.
Question 2
Answer: B
The relevant quote is:
"there is an obvious issue with this argument: it fails to explain the actual source of fairness and supplants this with a never-ending exchange in which morality equals fairness and fairness equals morality".
This immediately gives rise to three possibilities: A, B and C. It is true that a "never-ending exchange" could be termed "infinite" (A) or "indeterminate" (C). However, the correct term for any argument which cycles around interrelated factors in this way is a "circular argument". Therefore, B is the correct answer.
Question 3
Answer: A
The author asks whether defining fairness with reference to morality is "nonsense" and considers the alternative of defining it based on what the democratic majority thinks. However, the author concludes that the value of majoritarianism itself must have an explanation, and that comes back to the moral idea of the equal value of human life.
Similarly, the reason people vote as they do in the majoritarian system needs an explanation of its own. The author floats precedent, teachings and societal expectation but none of these are said to be any more important than the others. The author then reminds us that even precedent, teaching and expectation must have a source. What, then, is that source? It is strongly insinuated that - just as with fairness and majoritarianism itself - the answer is linked to morality. This is integral to the author's argument that majoritarianism is not an alternative basis for defining fairness to morality, but is in fact, linked to it.
Therefore, the correct answer is A.