Q7 - If rational-choice theory is correct,

[Laura Damone]

Question Type:
ID the Flaw

Stimulus Breakdown:
Conclusion: rational-choice theory can't be correct. Premises: if rational-choice theory was correct, then people would only do things they expect to benefit from. But there are a bunch of example of people not benefiting from their own actions.

Answer Anticipation:
Term Shift alert! Rational-choice theory being correct requires that people always expect to benefit from their actions. The second premise only proves that people don't always actually benefit from their actions. Predict an answer that calls out this gap in reasoning, either as an assumption the argument made or an objection the argument failed to consider.

Correct answer:
E

Answer choice analysis:
(A) This answer describes the Circular Reasoning flaw. Does the stimulus exhibit this flaw? Nope. This flavor of Circular Reasoning, assuming the conclusion as a premise, is only exhibited when the conclusion of an argument has to be true in order for one of the premises to be true. That's not the case here, so this, like so many other Circular Reasoning answer choices, is wrong.

(B) This answer describes the Unproven vs. Untrue flaw. This might be tempting because the stimulus does indeed conclude that a theory is false, but the premise for that conclusion never accuses the evidence for rational-choice theory of being hypothetical.

(C) This answer is tempting because it addresses the gap between expected benefit and actual benefit. But does our argument really take this for granted? No. The argument assumes that those who don't benefit didn't expect to benefit, not that those who do benefit did expect to.

(D) This is an irrelevant comparison, and the ranking language should be a red flag. And anyway, rational-choice theory would require that all action be undertaken because we expect to benefit from it. Even one legitimate counterexample would disprove the theory, so we don't need to make any assumptions establishing a large number of counterexamples.

(E) Aha! If resulting in no benefit doesn't mean the person expected no benefit, this argument falls apart. This addresses our gap in reasoning in the form of an objection to the argument.

Takeaway/Pattern:
When an ID the Flaw stimulus has a Term Shift, predict that the correct answer will call it out. That means there will probably be a lot of answer choices phrased as assumptions or objections the argument failed to consider. Named flaws the argument didn't exhibit (A and B) should be quick eliminations. Answer choices that describe an assumption (C and D) can be treated like Necessary Assumption answers. Ask "does the argument really need this to be true?" Answer choices that describe an objection (E) can be treated like Weakener answers. Ask "if this is true, does it wreck the argument?"

#officialexplanation