Q14 - Every time people get what

[kthalen]

I assume that this is conditional but I must be missing something here. I am lost with diagramming the last sentence of the stimulus (We can conclude that no one fundamentally...) and do not see how to properly parallel the logic.
Any help or explanation about why C is the correct answer here would be much appreciated. Thanks!

[tommywallach]

Hey Kthalen,

Let's take this one from bottom to top. We don't need to do this with diagramming, because there's only one conditional premise. (Diagramming is really only helpful when you have a string of 2-4 conditional statements as premises). So let's just do classic CORE study:

Conclusion: No one desires anything except pleasure
Premise: Pleasure naturally comes from getting what you want

This argument assumes that people desire only one specific outcome of an action (the giving of pleasure), as opposed to the action itself.

(A) This answer choice starts with "I am enjoying something though I thought I wouldn't." The equivalent doesn't exist in the original prompt. (It would be something like "People get pleasure when they get what they want, even though they think they won't.")

(B) The argument only connects desire to pleasure. This brings up skiing, terror, and learning--one too many issues!

(C) CORRECT. In this case, one result of the action is assumed to be reason the action is done in the first place. Pizza = getting what you want. Pleasure = headache. I eat pizza to get a stomachache = people only get what they want for pleasure.

(D) This is not a terribly flawed argument. (Or if it is, the error it makes is predicting the future based on the past. The original argument does not do this.)

(E) This is also a bad argument, but it makes a different, more traditional assumption than the prompt/Answer (C). This argument assumes something about basketball based on something about soccer. The two things aren't comparable.

Hope that helps!

-t

[kthalen]

Makes perfect sense, thank you!

[wgutx08]

(E) This is also a bad argument, but it makes a different, more traditional assumption than the prompt/Answer (C). This argument assumes something about basketball based on something about soccer. The two things aren't comparable.

Hey Tommy,
this may be a stupid question but I would appreciate it so much if you could help me with it---

I totally missed the "basketball" switch of E when PTing and picked E after comparing C and E.

I thought C is better than E because stomachache is the result of pizza, as is the case in the stimulus; whereas in E, eating hot dog is just something that always co-happens with going to soccer games.

However, I feel that the conclusion of C " the reason I eat pizza in the first place is to have a stomachache" is a bit extreme --- I could still eat pizza because I crave the pepperoni pieces although fundamentally, it is just a manifestation of my longing for a good stomachache. The conclusion in E, I thought, matches better with the stimulus.

So if the "basketball" in E is switched back to soccer, would you still pick C or would you take E instead? And for what reason?

Thanks so much!!!

[tommywallach]

Hey Wgut,

Two problems. First off, that switch would never happen, because then (E) would be a tautology. But still, it's making a fundamentally different argument from the prompt/(C).

The prompt is about why someone does something. Basically, the reason people desire stuff is to get pleasure. In (C), the reason people eat pizza is to get a stomachache.

In (E), it would just say "I never enjoy X without Y, so I guess I wouldn't enjoy X without Y." (This is a little bit circular anyway). But this isn't about why the person goes to soccer games. They aren't going in order to eat hot dogs. So it's not the same argument.

Hope that helps!

-t

[asmaa737]

Hi all,

When I read the stimulus, what I understand is that since pleasure is a result of what one wants, then it is the ONLY result. It excludes all other reasons because those reasons are not supposedly always the result of getting what one wants.

Is this understanding also correct, or am I missing something?


Thank you!

[zee.brad]

Hi all,

When I read the stimulus, what I understand is that since pleasure is a result of what one wants, then it is the ONLY result. It excludes all other reasons because those reasons are not supposedly always the result of getting what one wants.

Is this understanding also correct, or am I missing something?


Thank you!

Uhm I feel like the stimulus is telling us if something comes with the package, that means we DESIRE this at the first place. For example, you went to gym b/c you want to be fit but you get tired every single time. Does that mean you fundamentally want to be tired? Of course not, you want to be physically fit.
Hope this helps!

[qlewington]

I'm having a hard time getting my head around this question. Here are the premise and conclusion, as I understand them:

Premise: If you get what you want then you get pleasure.
Conclusion: One only ever fundamentally wants pleasure.
Assumption: One only ever fundamentally wants the result of a thing—i.e., pleasure.

And here is (C):

Premise: If I eat pizza then I get a stomachache.
Conclusion: I only eat pizza because I want a stomachache.
Assumption: I only want the result of pizza.

Kosher?

[valmir_merkaj]

Looks good. Small change for the first premise, it would be more accurate to write "feel pleasure".

The flaw is: when you get what you want, you feel pleasure. Therefore, you want pleasure. However, you can't conclude that because you could want other things and the pleasure just follows you getting what you want.


For the pizza example: the reason you eat the pizza is to get full. So even though a stomach ache follows you eating the pizza, that was not the reason you ate it. It was to get full.

A real world example is that when people eat a lot, they get fat. But the reason they eat a lot is not to get fat, but because they enjoy food, they broke up with their spouse, or whatever reason.

[donghai819]

I am having a hard time recognizing this flaw. Can any teacher elaborate more on this particular flaw?

[maryadkins]

The flaw is assuming that you always want what you get.

The reason it's a flaw is because there are all kinds of things people get that we don't want, or had never even thought about. If I eat pizza, it's almost certainly a flaw to say that I wanted a stomach ache, even if I get one after eating the slice. If I get rich from writing a bestselling book, that may make me very happy, but it doesn't mean I wrote in the book in ORDER to get rich.

You can think of it as the difference between what is SUBJECTIVELY DESIRED and what is OBJECTIVELY AN OUTCOME. These do not have to match up, even if they sometimes do.

[hyk1310]

I think there's a really quick way to solve this question, and I would like your opinion on this.

A, B, D, E have uncertainties in its concluding statements; "I Guess or I expect" is a degree of uncertainty shown by the answer choices, whereas C has a definitive concluding statement.

The stimulus also is definitive "We can conclude."

Is this a quick and valid way of eliminating the wrong choices?

Thank you for your help.