PT158.S3.Q23 > Question

SECTION 1 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7

PASSAGE 2

Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13

PASSAGE 3

Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20

PASSAGE 4

Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27

SECTION 2 · lr

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25

SECTION 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · lr

According to rational-choice theory, we can explain why various political parties are popular in terms of deliberate decisions by voters to support parties they believe will bring the voters the greatest economic advantage.

Many sociologists oppose this theory. They oppose this theory based on the premise that a complex phenomenon — such as the popularity of political parties — cannot be caused by a simple phenomenon.

The sociologists must believe that voters’ choosing to support parties based on which party they think will bring the most economic advantage is a simple phenomenon. This is something the sociologists must think in order for their premise to support their conclusion. If voters’ choosing to support based on economic advantage were NOT a simple phenomenon, then why would the sociologists reject rational-choice theory on the basis of the belief that a complex phenomenon can’t be explained by simple a phenomenon?

This must be assumed by the sociologists. This is why they think voters’ supporting parties based on economics can’t explain a complex phenomenon such as the rise of political parties. To the sociologists, voters’ supporting parties based on economics is too simple to explain this.

The sociologists believe a complex phenomenon can’t be caused by a simple phenomenon. But this doesn’t mean they think a complex phenomenon must have “many” complex causes. They’re open to a single non-simple cause of a complex phenomenon.

We have no basis to think the sociologists believe religious and cultural causes are involved. All we know is they think the “voters support parties based on economics” is too simple to explain support for political parties. Whether religious and cultural factors must be involved is unknown.

Anti-supported, because the sociologists believe that “the rise of a political organization” is a complex phenomenon.

The sociologists don’t believe that voters aren’t deciding based on economic advantage. Rather, the sociologists don’t believe that this can explain why different parties become popular. There’s a difference between denying X, and denying that X causes Y. The sociologists are denying that X causes Y. That doesn’t mean they deny that X occurs.

PrepTest 158 - Section 3 - Question 23

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action