#19 - Speaker: Contemporary business firms need to recognize

[angelsfan0055]

I'm wondering how B is the correct answer. I initially chose this answer but I thought it was an example of a shell game, because the conclusion focuses on businesses that want to remain power, not solely institutions. I was picking between B and E and since the conclusion solely focused on businesses remaining in power, I thought that B was a trap answer.

Could you explain how B is the correct even if it focuses on the broad institutions rather than business as articulated in the conclusion?

[katehos]

Hi angelsfan0055!

The word institution here, as you mentioned, is broader than the term business, but I think you're overthinking this one! The word "institution" certainly applies to businesses, as they are institutions. You can even find evidence for this within the stimulus itself, as the Iron Law of Responsibility is said to specifically apply to "human institutions" by the author, who then discusses how this applies to businesses specifically. So, it still weakens the argument for the reasons addressed by the the other instructors.

I hope this helps!
Kate

[lemonade42]

Hi Powerscore,

I know that I have to find an answer that allows the sufficient condition (WRP) to occur without the necessary condition (AR). So I chose (C) as the answer because I thought that "the power of some institutions erodes more slowly than the power of others, whether they are socially responsible or not" would mean this is possible: an institution whose power erodes more slowly (suggesting a business that wishes to retain its power as long as it can) that is not socially responsible. I thought that would be an example of the sufficient condition (WRP) occurring without the necessary condition (AR) and therefore weaken the argument.

Can you help explain why that's wrong? Thank you!

[Luke Haqq]

Hi lemonade42!

A problem with answer choice (C) is that it's not really giving us specific information about the institutions it's discussing. (C) is just saying the rate of erosion may be different for different companies, regardless of their social responsibility (e.g., perhaps bigger companies erode slower than smaller companies, or maybe vice versa). Even if that were the case, it could still hold true that to retain power for as long as possible, companies must act responsibly. (C) thus doesn't ultimately weaken this conclusion.

[argumentace]

I identified the conclusion and diagrammed the conditional relationship correctly, however I still don’t understand how B (public relations programs can cause society to consider an institution, socially responsible even when it is not) is the correct answer. I ended up choosing D, and while I understand why it’s wrong, I can’t wrap my head around why B is 100% right. While I don’t think the other options are right, I think B is too weak to be considered right considering that the conclusion rests on society’s perspective of responsibility, which is being met in B “ …can cause society to consider an institution socially responsible, even when it is not”. Isn’t all the matters that the business is “considered” responsible? If so, then the Necessary Condition is technically still met.

The stimulus uses subjective words to note that society’s perspective is the ultimate decider, even if their consideration/thought is incorrect, no?:
“ in the long run, those who do not use power in a manner which society considers responsible will tend to lose it”

“ though the long run may require decades or even centuries in some instances, society ultimately acts to reduce power when society thinks it is not being used responsibly”

[Jeff Wren]

Hi argumentace,

You wrote,

"While I don’t think the other options are right, I think B is too weak to be considered right considering that the conclusion rests on society’s perspective of responsibility" (my emphasis).

Actually, the conclusion doesn't rest on society’s perspective of responsibility

Take another look at the exact wording of the conclusion. "Therefore, a business that wishes to retain its power as long as it can must act responsibly" (my emphasis). The conclusion does not say that the business must "appear to act responsibly." It must actually act responsibly.

It's the premises of the argument that refer to society's perception of the whether the institutions are acting responsibly. This shift from the appearance/perception of acting responsibly in the premises to actually acting responsibly in the conclusion is the key to the flaw in the argument and why Answer B weakens this argument. Answer B is showing that it may be possible to appear to act responsibly (and thus satisfy Davis and Blomstrom's Iron Law of Responsibility) without actually needing to act responsibly as required in the conclusion.

In other words, the argument is assuming that the only way to appear to act responsibly is to actually act responsibly. Answer B shows that this isn't necessarily the only way to appear to act responsibly.