Self-study
The following passage is adapted from an article published in 1993.
P1
███ ██████ ██████ ███ ██████████ ██ ███ █ █████████ █████████████ █ █████ ██ █████ █ ███████████ ███████ ████ █████████ ███ █████████ ███████ ███████ ████████ ██ ██████████ ███
Question ·
How severe should punishment be for corporate crime?
E.g., crime where a corporation profits from harming consumers
Economists' Answer ·
Depends solely on a cost-benefit analysis
E.g., if profits were $6 million, then a fine in excess of that would suffice
P2
██ ███████ █████ ███ ██████████ ████ ████ ███ ████ ████ █ █████████ ███ ████ ████ ██████ ████ █████████ ████ ██████ ██ ████ ██ ████ █ ███████ █████ ███ ██████████ ██ ████ █████████████ ███ ████ ███ ███████████ █████████ ██████ ██ ███████ ███████ █████████████ ███ ██ █ ██████ ██ ███████████ ██████████ ███ ████ ███ ██████████ ██████ ██████ ██████ █████████████ ████████ ██████ ████ ███ ██ ██████ █████ █████████
Economists' Answer ·
Punishment should only affect earnings
Morality should not be a factor in determining the punishment
P3
███ ████ ████████ █████ ██████ ███████████ ██ ███ ██████████ ██ ███████ ███
Critique / Major Premise ·
Economists' approach is impractical
Sub-premise ·
Cost-benefit analysis must account for estimated detection ratios
Not every crime is detected. If corporations were punished only for the crimes that are detected, they would actually be incentivized to keep committing the crime and reaping profits.
Sub-premise ·
Accounting for detection ratios greatly increases severity of financial penalites
E.g., if detection ratio is 1-in-10, then the penalty has to be at least 10 times profit. If penalty is only, say 5x profit, then it's worth it for the company to keep committing that crime.
P4
███ ███████████ ████████ ████████ ████ █████████ ██████ ██ ████ ██████ ███ ██████ ██ ██████ ████ ███ ███████ ██ ██████ ███ ██████ ███████ ███████ ████ ██████ ███ ██ ████ ██████ ██ ██ ████████ █████ █████ ███ ████████████ █████████ █████████ ██ ███████ ███ ████ █████████ ██ ████ ███ ███████ █████ ████████ ███ █████████ ████████████ ███ ██ ████████ ███ █████ █████████ ██ ██████ ███ ██ █████ ███
Sub-premise ·
Actual detection ration is closer to 1-in-10
Such high fines might put corporations out of business and throw thousands of people out of work. That's not practical.
Main Point ·
Another criterion for punishment, in addition to cost-benefit analysis, must be considered
For example, we could assign moral weight to particular crimes to determine a punishment that is just and practical
Passage Style
Critique or debate
12.
Which one of the following ████ ██████████ ██████████ ███ ████████████ ██ ███ ████████
a
A question is ███████ ███ ██████ ██ ███ ████████ ██ ███████████ ██ █████████ ██████ ██ ████ ██████ ██ ██████████ █ ████ ██ ███ ██████ ██ ███████████ ███ ████ ███ ██ ███████████ ██████ ██ █████████
This best captures the overall organization. Every other answer contains a description that’s inaccurate.
b
A problem is ██████ ███ ████████ ██ ███ ███████ ██ ███████████ █ ████ ████ ██ █████ ███ █████ ███ ████████ ██ ██████████ █ █████████ ██ ███ ████████ ██ ███████████ ███ █████████ ██ █████████ ███ █████████
The author doesn’t reject her own criticism. She is the one who criticizes the economists’ solution to the problem described in P1.
c
A view is ███████████ ███ ██████ ██ █████ ███ ████ ███ ████ ███ ██████████ █ ████ ██ ███ ██████ ██ █████ ███████ ███ ████ ██ ██████████ ███ █████████ ██ ███████ ███ ████ ██ █████████ ██ ███████████ ████ ██ ████████
The author doesn’t describe the “ethics of those who hold the view” — nowhere do we discuss the ethics of the economists. The author also does not criticize the ethics of the economists. The author simply criticizes the view of the economists. The economists believe cost/benefit should be the sole criterion; the author points out why this is a flawed view.
d
A question is ███████ ███ ███████ ██ ███ ████████ ███ ██████████ ███ █████████ ██ ██████████ ██████████ ████ ██████ ██ ███████████ ███ ██████████ ██ ███ ██████ ██ █████ ██ ██ █████████ ███ ████ ██████ ██ █████████
The author doesn’t present two answers to the question raised in the beginning. The author presents one answer — the economists’ answer. Then the author points out an assumption underlying that answer. She doesn’t point out the assumptions underlying two different answers.
e
A problem is ██████ ███ ████████████ ██ ███████ ██ █████ ███ ███████ ███ ██████████ ███ ████████ ██ ███ ███████ ██ ██████████ ██ █████████ ██ ████ ████████ ██ ██████████ ███ ████████ ████████ ██ █████████
The author doesn’t describe the consequences of failing to solve the problem of determining punishments for corporate crime.