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. Developments both technological and sociocultural have afforded us far greater freedom over death than we had in the past, and while we are still adapting ourselves to that freedom, we now appreciate the moral importance of this freedom.
2. But I believe that a type of freedom we can call freedom over death – that is, a freedom in which we shape the timing and circumstances of how we die – should be central to this conversation.
3. Legalising assisted dying is but a further step in realising this freedom over death.
4. Many people endorse, through their opinions or their choices, our freedom over death encompassing a right to medical assistance in hastening our deaths.
5. Freedom is a notoriously complex and contested philosophical notion, and I won't pretend to settle any of the big controversies it raises.
Answer: 4
Four sentences present the author's case that "freedom over death" should frame the discussion:
- 5 opens by admitting freedom is a complex, contested idea that the author won't try to settle.
- 2 follows with "But I believe": a particular kind of freedom, freedom over death, should be central.
- 1 explains how technological and sociocultural developments have widened this freedom compared with the past.
- 3 concludes that legalising assisted dying is "but a further step" in that historical expansion.
The chain 5-2-1-3 moves from concept to definition to historical growth to the next step. Sentence 4 changes the angle to public opinion: many people endorse a right to medical help in hastening death. That is a survey of people's views, not part of the author's argument. It also states the assisted-dying point as already accepted, which would make 3's "further step" redundant.
Hence, the answer is 4.