Kant reappeared in Question 34 of the English section, identified by EBS as one of the section’s most difficult items.

The passage explained Kant’s view that the rule of law provides the essential foundation for security, peace and genuine freedom, enabling societies to progress toward more rational and legally regulated forms of coexistence. Rather than relying on human goodness, Kant believed that universal law is necessary precisely because humans are prone to conflict. A binding legal framework, he argues, even for “a nation of devils,” can ensure harmony.

Ideally, such laws express principles that all rational beings would choose and therefore embody freedom rather than restrict it.

The question was a fill-in-the-blank requiring students not only to understand the passage’s main point but to choose an answer that was opposite of the correct conceptual fit. The blank appeared in the sentence: “If such laws forbid them to do something that they would not rationally choose to do anyway, then the law cannot be _________.”

Because the phrase “cannot be” inverted the logic, students had to select the option that did not align with Kant’s main argument, adding to the difficulty.