#15 - Technological innovations rarely serves the interest

[mp1224]

Hello,

I am having difficulty understanding the answer choices for this LR question, specifically B) and D), which is likely why I cannot tell why answer D) is the correct choice.

Could someone please break down these two answer choices for me?

I am only a third of the way through the LRB, so if this question appears in the bible, please let me know!

Thank you!

[Malila Robinson]

Hi mp1224,
In this question the argument is putting forth 2 statements that are not conditionally linked, but the argument assumes that they are.

One statement is: If some things are technological innovations Then most will be motivated by personal gain rather than societal benefit.

The argument then assumes that: If some things are technological innovations Then they rarely serve society as a whole.

So the flaw is Answer D: "takes for granted that an action is unlikely to produce a certain outcome (societal benefit) unless it is motivated by a desire to produce that outcome (societal benefit)." Here the motivation is usually a personal benefit so the author is assuming that will not result in an additional societal benefit.

Answer B states: "takes for granted that technology beneficial to society as a whole cannot be commercially viable" But this is beyond the scope of the argument which only talks about commercially viable innovations that were created based upon a desire for personal gain. The author might agree that other commercially viable creations might be beneficial to society if they were not created from a desire for personal gain.

Hope that helps!
-Malila

[Tomars]

Is the only problem with B that it focuses on the wrong aspect of technology. The stimulus argues that technology rarely benefits society as a whole because they are usually created to be commercially viable/for personal gain."

So a potential answer would have to weaken the causal argument... by showing that tech created for commercial viability could still benefit society as a whole.

So if B was reversed to say "takes for granted that technology developed to be commercially viable cannot be beneficial to society as a whole", would this then be correct?

[Malila Robinson]

Hi Tomars,
This is a Flaw question, not a Weaken question so that may be throwing you off. You can bring in outside info for a Weaken question, but for a Flaw question you have to explain the problem that already exists in the argument. That is why D is the correct answer in this case.
Hope that helps!
-Malila

[JulesC]

Hello,

What kind of flaw would you characterize this question as having? While doing this question I mentally categorized it as an "attacking someone's intentions" argument, but I'm not sure if that is the best way to describe it.

Thanks,

Jules

[KelseyWoods]

Hi Jules!

You are correct that it is sort of similar to a Source Argument (also known as an ad hominem argument). In a true Source Argument, however, the author attacks someone else's argument based on their actions of intentions. For example" "This tech CEO says that his app will help the world but he must be wrong because he only created this app to help himself." The tech CEO's motivations are irrelevant in determining whether or not his argument (that his app will help the world) is valid.

The argument presented here is slightly different, however, because the author is not attacking an argument that someone else is making. Instead, it's saying that if something was created with the purpose of personal gain, it cannot then serve the interests of others.

Many flaws that you will encounter on the test cannot be neatly categorized but they all boil down to the idea that the premises as stated do not fully prove the conclusion as stated. So if you can identify why the premises do not equal the conclusion, that's all you need to do to identify the flaw!

Hope this helps!

Best,
Kelsey

[chiickenx]

Can someone double check my reasoning? I had no clue what the above posts were really saying, but this is what i thought was going on for why (B) was the wrong AC.

It didn't say anything about the two being mutually exclusive… Its kinda tricky because i think it assumes that “if you strive to be commercially viable, then you are motivated by personal gain and not by societal benefit.”But that is not to say that tech does benefit society as a whole cannot be commercially viable…

[Adam Tyson]

Checked and confirmed, chiickenx! Your rationale for eliminating answer B is solid! Good work!

[ashutosh_73]

I think (B) can be eliminated without resorting to conditional, but i am not sure whether my reasoning is correct:

Stimulus says: technological advances motivated by personal gain IN THAT they strive to develop commercially viable technology

My emphasis was on ''IN THAT''
Just because ''Commercial viable tech'' is a subset of ''Personal gain'' doesn't mean that it can't be a subset of ''Societal gain''

[Luke Haqq]

Hi ashutosh_73!

Your reasoning sounds correct to me. What you describe is similar to what (D) imparts. Just because those behind technological advances are motivated by personal gain doesn't mean that those advances couldn't benefit the interests of society as well.