ELF – Engelsk läsförståelse (HPVAR2025P4)

In the following text there are gaps which indicate that something has been left out. Look at the four alternatives that correspond to each gap and decide which one best fits the gap. Then mark your choice on your answer sheet.

Moral Rules

Most people strictly adhere to moral rules – such as “thou shalt not kill” – even when breaking them leads to a better outcome, such as sacrificing one person to save five. Is it just a bug in our ethical __1__?

In philosophical terms, maximizing results is called utilitarian, whereas prioritizing rights and duties is called deontological. A 2013 study revealed that even when people claim it is moral to, say, throw a dying man overboard to keep a life raft afloat, they view someone who does such a thing as lacking empathy and integrity. A recent paper measures people’s __2__ behavior toward those who make such utilitarian decisions. In several experiments, psychologists Jim Everett, Molly Crockett and David Pizarro asked American adults to respond to moral dilemmas and then interact with other supposed respondents online. When those respondents said they would push a man off a footbridge to block a trolley from killing five rail workers, __3__ rated them as less moral and trustworthy, and they entrusted them with less money in an investment game. We don’t evaluate other people on their philosophical ideologies per se, Pizarro says. Rather, we look at how others’ moral decisions “express the kind of motives, commitments and emotions we want people to have.” Coolheaded calculation has its benefits, but we want our friends to at least flinch before personally __4__ others. Indeed, people in the study who had argued for pushing the man were trusted more when they claimed that the decision was difficult. Politicians and executives should pay heed. Leading requires making hard trade-offs: is a war or a cut in employee benefits worth the pain it inflicts? According to Pizarro, “you want your leader to genuinely have – or at least be good at displaying – the right kind of __5__ when they’re talking about that decision, to show that they didn’t arrive at it callously.” Calmly weighing costs and benefits may do the most good for the most people, but it can also be a good way to lose friends. Matthew Hutson, Scientific American Mind

A General State of Mourning

The century between 1700 and 1800 saw the deaths of four British monarchs, two consorts, one Prince of Wales, one dowager Princess of Wales and an assortment of other princes and princesses. Virtually all were remembered by a period of widespread public mourning. This was expressed in a variety of ways, most notably by the donning of primarily black clothing by huge swathes of the population, often for months at a time.

The length and extent of public mourning varied and depended upon the position of the deceased within the royal family and the directions of the monarch. Mourning for William III ended 11 months after his death and on the birthday of his successor, Queen Anne. She, too, was mourned for a year, as was George I. George II, however, received only six months, thanks to a change he himself had implemented in 1728. This halved all future mourning periods and was motivated in large part by a need to assist the textile industry, which often faced ruin when stocks of luxury and coloured fabrics became instantly unsellable.

To ensure synchronised mourning (in southern England at least) and to clarify for the public what clothing was acceptable, mourning orders were issued and placed in newspapers, with mourning delayed until a week or so after the death to allow people to update their wardrobes. Sufficient time was not allowed for the information to reach more provincial regions though, let alone Ireland or the north of Scotland, and as a result mourning frequently began late in these areas.

In the early part of the century, mourning orders were fairly rudimentary: on the death of William III they stipulated only that all persons ‘put themselves into the deepest Mourning that may be’. By the time of George I’s death, however, mourning had become far more elaborate and the use of phases was emerging, which varied in length and had their own specific sartorial requirements. As well as clothing, mourning touched many other aspects of life. Churches were hung in black, their bells muffled and sermons and eulogies (which might later be published) were preached from their pulpits. Court functions were suspended. Many even chose to seal their letters with black wax. So pervasive was public mourning, in fact, that it must have been hard to avoid completely, even for the poor or disinterested.

Given its expensive and oppressive nature, one might reasonably wonder at the longevity of state mourning, which continued beyond the 18th century. Few would have known the deceased well enough to feel genuine sadness and there were frequent complaints about the expense and inconvenience of mourning them. No doubt many simply went through the motions out of deference to convention and a sense of loyalty to the institution of royalty, but perhaps more important is the fact that mourning was not all bad. Purveyors of high fashion might suffer, but the manufacturers of Norwich crape (which increasingly became the must-have fabric for such occasions) could turn a tidy profit from a royal death, while the rich and snobbish could use the opportunity to show off their wealth and social status through their ability to purchase new clothing at short notice.

Even some of mourning’s more irksome aspects might be alleviated by a well-timed death. George I’s passing, for instance, had little impact on the theatre industry, as the playhouses were already closed for the summer.

Finally, those at a safe distance from the watchful eye of the royal court could, on occasion, ignore certain aspects of public mourning altogether. The key was safety in numbers. One needed to be surrounded by a like-minded peer group with a blasé approach to mourning and no local grandee of sufficient standing prepared to enforce the rules. The Dublin elite managed just such a feat in the spring of 1738, when mourning for Queen Caroline ceased as soon as the Lord Lieutenant, the Duke of Devonshire, had left the country.

Today few traces of general mourning remain in the UK, though the widespread and spontaneous outpouring of grief upon the death of Diana, Princess of Wales, in 1997, shows that it can still emerge, albeit in a different form than that of the 18th century. Indeed, the sense that we know the modern British royal family thanks to the media exposure they are subject to, means that, while general mourning is no longer enforced, when it does occur it is perhaps a sign of genuine respect and affection rather than the compulsory duty fulfilled by so many of past generations.

Rachel Wilson, History Today