Original statement:
it is rational not to acquire such info unless one expects that the benefits of doing so will outweigh the cost and difficulty of doing so
Two ideas:
rational not acquire info
expects benefits outweigh c&d
Group 3 Rule: negate sufficient
[not] expects benefits outweigh c&d --> rational not acquire info
Contrapositive:
[not] rational not acquire info --> expects benefits outweigh c&d
A
The inability of Alzheimer’s patients to eliminate the protein BA from the brain is due to a deficiency in the brain’s immune system.
B
Acetylsalicylic acid reduces the production of immune cells in the brain.
C
The activity of microglia results in a decrease in the buildup of protein deposits in the brain.
D
The protein BA directly interferes with the cognitive functions of the brain.
E
Immune reactions by microglia occur in certain diseases of the brain other than Alzheimer’s.
Science writer: Scientists’ astounding success rate with research problems they have been called upon to solve causes the public to believe falsely that science can solve any problem. In fact, the problems scientists are called upon to solve are typically selected by scientists themselves. When the problems are instead selected by politicians or business leaders, their formulation is nevertheless guided by scientists in such a way as to make scientific solutions feasible. Scientists are almost never asked to solve problems that are not subject to such formulation.
Summary
Scientists appear to have a very high success rate at solving problems they’re called upon to solve, and this creates the false impression that scientists can solve any problem. But the apparently very high success rate is a result of scientists’ ability to pick the problems they solve or to formulate the problems they’re asked to solve in a way that makes a scientific solution possible. In other words, the kinds of problems they’re tackling are an unrepresentative sample of problems overall.
Strongly Supported Conclusions
The high problem-solving success rate of scientists wouldn’t be as high if they tried to solve the entire set of problems.
The public overestimates the ability of scientists to solve problems.
A
If a problem can be formulated in such a way as to make a scientific solution feasible, scientists will usually be called upon to solve that problem.
Unsupported. Although many problem scientists are called upon to solve can be formulated in ways that make science solutions feasible, this doesn’t tell us about most of the problems that can be formulated in that way.
B
Any problem a scientist can solve can be formulated in such a way as to make a scientific solution feasible.
Unsupported, because the stimulus doesn’t tell us about any problem a scientist can solve. We only know about problems scientists have been called upon to solve.
C
Scientists would probably have a lower success rate with research problems if their grounds for selecting such problems were less narrow.
Strongly supported, because we know that people have a false impression of scientists’ ability to solve problems from the success rate of problems they’re called upon to solve. These problems are likely unrepresentative set; success rate is likely higher for those problems.
D
Most of the problems scientists are called upon to solve are problems that politicians and business leaders want solved, but whose formulation the scientists have helped to guide.
Unsupported. We know that most problems scientists are called on to solve are selected by scientists. But we don’t know whether any portion of these are problems politicians and business leaders want solved.
E
The only reason for the astounding success rate of science is that the problems scientists are called upon to solve are usually selected by the scientists themselves.
Antisupported, because we also know that part of the reason for the success rate is scientists’ ability to formulate the problem chosen by politicians and business leaders in a way that makes scientific solutions feasible.