For them, one can no more choose one’s sense of obligation to a group, or the lack of it, than one can choose one’s personality.

The Moral Foundation of Politics by Ian Shapiro

I don't understand the connection between no more and than. What does no more choosing something than something means? Or am I getting this sentence wrong? Can please someone explain this sentence to me?


A. Can one choose one's sense of obligation to a group?

B. Can one choose one's personality?

The author thinks one can not choose one's personality, and claims that choosing one's obligation to a group is not possible either.

If B is impossible, and
A is no more possible than B
then A is also impossible.

A simpler example might clarify things:

I would no more buy designer shoes than throw my money away.

There is a variant of this structure, using "sooner":
I would no sooner argue with him than I would bark at my dog.

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.