Passage Summary: Just because ancient people didn't have a specific word for 'moral rights' doesn't mean they didn't understand the idea, much like you can pick and eat a fruit without knowing what it's called.

Conclusion: It is incorrect to assume ancient civilizations lacked the concept of moral rights just because their languages lacked a specific word for it.

Reasoning: Just as a person can recognize, interact with, and study a physical object (like fruit) without knowing its name, a culture can understand a conceptual framework without having a specific vocabulary term for it.

Analysis: The argument relies on an analogy between physical objects (fruit) and abstract concepts (moral rights). For this analogy to hold, the author must assume that concepts can be understood in the absence of language, just as physical objects can be perceived without labels. Look for an assumption that bridges the gap between 'having a concept' and 'having a word for that concept.' Specifically, the argument needs it to be possible for someone to grasp a complex moral idea without needing a dedicated term to define it.