#18 - In order to cut costs and thereby maximize his profit,

[Administrator]

Please post your questions below!

[danimcca]

Hi, can someone please give an explanation for this Q! I see 347 people have viewed this question and no one has asked
I crossed D out and I am not sure why.
Thanks !

[Frank Peter]

Hi Danimcca,

In this justify the conclusion question, we are looking for an additional premise that would allow the conclusion to be properly drawn.

We are told that he used inferior materials to maximize profits. We are also told that he must have realized that this would put people at risk. Then the conclusion is that this was wrong for him to do.

So we are looking to link up the concepts of taking an action that puts people at risk to maximize profits, and the conclusion that this was wrong to do.

(D) directly states that: It is wrong to knowingly put people at serious risk for the sake of profit.

Sometimes I find that these questions can be challenging because when we read them, we intuitively make the logical links necessary in order for the argument to make sense as we read it, even if we're not conscious that we're doing so. Even though (D) may sound a little bit obvious and possibly simplistic, it is the missing piece the argument needs for the purpose of this question.

[theamazingrace]

I understand why D is the right answer but can you please explain why A and E are wrong?

Thanks

[Paul Marsh]

Hey theamazingrace! Nice job understanding why D is the right answer here.

Like Frank said above, we are looking for an additional premise that would allow the conclusion to be properly drawn. Our premises tell us that Mr. Kapp "must have realized that his actions would put people at serious risk". So we already know that Mr. Kapp knew his actions would put people at risk. So answer choices A and E don't really tell us anything we don't already know; they both sort of just restate that same premise.

Instead, we're looking for a new piece of information that will allow us to reach our conclusion. Our conclusion here tells us that it was wrong for Mr. Kapp to do so. The idea of right or wrong isn't introduced in our premises; it's brand new info in our conclusion. Whenever we have brand new information in our conclusion (sometimes called a "rogue element") in a Justify question, our answer choice will generally need to explain where that new information is coming from. Answer choice D successfully introduces that "rogue element" of right/wrong, and so our conclusion can validly follow. Again, choices A and E do nothing to address the "rogue element" and instead just re-state the premise, so they do nothing to help us reach our conclusion.

Hope that helps!

[elijahpitt123]

I was in between B and D on this question, and I want to make sure I have the right reasoning for eliminating B. Is B incorrect because the stimulus says "whether legal or not" so there is no need to make the link between morality and legality?

[Rachael Wilkenfeld]

Hi Elijah,

We need to prove the conclusion that it was wrong to cut costs to maximize profits. Answer choice (B) is phrased in terms of possibility. It "could" be wrong to behave in that way, but it doesn't prove that it WAS wrong. When you need to justify a conclusion, look to the strength of the conclusion. A strong conclusion needs strong support. A weak conclusion is much easier to support. Answer choice (D) is correct because it fully supports the conclusion by stating the action WAS wrong.

Hope that helps!