Self-study
Claude: When I'm having lunch with job candidates, I watch to see if they salt their food without first tasting it. ██ ████ ███ █ █████ ████ ███████ █████ ███████ ███████ ██████ █████████ █████ ██ ██████████ ████████████
████████ ██████ ██████ ████ █████████ ██████████ ███ ██ ██ ████ █ ███████ ████████ █ ██ ████ █ ████████████ ███████ █ ███████ ████ ████████████ ███ ██████ ███ ████ ██████ ██ ████ ███ ███ █ █████ ████ █ ██████ ████ █████ ████ █████ ██ ███ █████ ███████ █ ███████ ████ ████ ██ ██████ ███ ███ ███ ████████ ████ ███ ███ ██ ████ █████ ██ ██████████ ███ ███
Summary
Larissa concludes that it’s silly for Claude to assume that someone is making an uninformed decision just because they salt their food before tasting it. As support, she gives two analogies: it’s reasonable that she wears a sweater to stores, since she knows they’re always too cold for her, and also that she throws out credit card offers, since she knows they won’t be worth it for her.
Notable Assumptions
We need to find the underlying principle that Larissa uses to support her criticism of Claude’s argument.
The implication that all three scenarios are reasonable rests on the principle that when it comes to preferences, doing something without checking the exact situation first isn’t necessarily bad decision making, since it might be based on one’s general understanding and personal experience of such situations.
25.
The two analogies that Larissa ██████ ███ ████ ██████████ ██ ███████████ ██ ████████ █████ ███ ██ ███ █████████ ██████████ ██ █████████ ████████ ███████
a
In matters involving ████████ ███████████ ██████████ ██ ██████ ███████ █████ ████████████ ███████ ██ ██ ███████████ ██ ███ ████████ █████████████ ██████ ███ ██ █████ ██ ████ ████████ ██ ██████ ████████ ███████ ███████ ███ ██████ ███ ██ █████ ██ █ ████████ ██████ ████████ ██ █████████ ██ █ ███████ ████ █████ ███ ██████████████
Maybe some people know restaurant food isn’t salty enough for them— just like Larissa knows stores are too cold for her and credit card offers aren’t worth it for her. She implies that these scenarios may be based on reasonable knowledge of circumstances, rather than on bad decision making.
b
In professional decision-making █████████ █████ ███ ████ ███ ██████████████ ██ ███████ █████ ████████ ███████████ ███ █ ███ ██████ ███ ███ ████████████ ██ ███████████ ████████ ██ █ █████ ███ █████████ ███████ ███████████ █████ █████ ████████ ██████████
Larissa’s analogies are about personal decision-making contexts, not professional ones. Also, (B) suggests that Claude shouldn’t judge his candidates based on observations of job-related behavior, but he’s actually observing behavior that isn’t job-related.
c
General conclusions regarding █ ███ ███████████ ███████████ ███ █ ████████ ██████ ███ ██ █████ ███████████ ██ ████████████ ██ ███ ███████████ ████████ ██ ██████████ ████ ███ ███████ ████████ ███ ███████ ███ ██████ ██ ██ ██████████ ██ █ ███████ ██ ████████ ████ ███ █████████ ███████ ███
This suggests Claude shouldn’t judge candidates only based on their behavior in non-job related situations. This is a criticism of Claude, but it isn’t Larissa’s criticism. She suggests that Claude is making unfair assumptions about his candidates’ behavior in the first place.
d
Individuals whose behavior ██ ████████ █████████████ ████ ███ ███████ ██ █████████ ████████ █████ ██████ ███ █████████████ ██ ██████████ ███████████ ████ ███████ ██████ █████████████ ███████ ████ ███████████ ███ ██ ██████ ██ ██████████ ████ ████████ ████████ ████ ████ ███████ ██████ ██ █████████ ███████ ██ ██████ ██ ███████ ██████████████
Neither Claude nor Larissa mention whether the candidates’ behavior conforms to social norms. They’re discussing whether candidates’ behavior is evidence of bad decision making.
e
Evidence that a ██████████ ██████████ ████ ███ ███████████████ ██████████ ██ ███████ ██ ████████ █████ ██████ ███ ██ ██████████ ██████████ ██ ███████ █ ████████ ██████████ ██ ███ ██ ███ ███████████ ███ █ ████ ███████ ███ ████ ████████ █████ ███ ████ ██████████ ██████ ██ ███████████ ████ ██████ ██ ████ ████████
Larissa doesn’t invoke this principle. She never agrees that there actually is evidence that Claude’s candidates are using bad decision-making strategies at all.