Critical Reasoning

Speaker: Contemporary business firms need to
recognize that avoiding social responsibility
leads to the gradual erosion of power. This is
Davis and Blomstrom's Iron Law of
Responsibility: "In the long run, those who do
not use power in a manner which society
considers responsible will tend to lose it." The
law's application to human institutions
certainly stands confirmed by history. Though
the "long run" may require decades or even
centuries in some instances, society ultimately
acts to reduce power when society thinks it is
not being used responsibly. Therefore, a
business that wishes to retain its power as long
as it can must act responsibly.
Which one of the following statements, if true, most
weakens the speaker's argument?
(A) Government institutions are as subject to the
Iron Law of Responsibility as business
institutions.
(B) Public relations programs can cause society to
consider an institution socially responsible
even when it is not.
(C) The power of some institutions erodes more
slowly than the power of others, whether they
are socially responsible or not.
(D) Since no institution is eternal, every business
will eventually fail.
(E) Some businesses that have used power in
socially responsible ways have lost it.



As per Book option C :

power
retention, especially between socially responsible and non-socially responsible
institutions. If you read this answer thinking that the stimulus indicated socially
responsible institutions do not lose power if socially responsible, then you made
a quasi-Mistaken Reversal of the stimulus. There is never a presumption in the
argument that power can be held indefinitely. If there were, this answer would
be much more attractive.



I didn't get it at all.


Can anyone please explain this.

That explanation does not make sense.

What it seems to be saying is that if the argument said that socially responsible institutions never lose power, C would undermine that conclusion. However, C does not say that all institutions lose power eventually.

That explanation does seem to fit D. Maybe it was meant for D?

Hi Marty,

Nope the solution is for option C.


I choose option C because I felt this means there is not any impact whether any company is socially responsible or not it can lose power.

What's your thoughts on this?


I see option C as a better choice than option B.

Option C discusses something vaguely and indirectly related to the argument.

Choice B says something that directly undermines the argument.

The argument says that society acts to reduce power when society feels that power is not being used responsibly. The conclusion of the argument is that therefore in order to retain power an institution must use it responsibly.

B provides an alternative way to retain power. Rather than using power responsibly, an institution could use public relations programs to convince society that the institution is acting responsibly even though in reality it is not.

This undermines the conclusion that to retain power one must use it responsibly, because an institution can not act responsibly and at the same time, via using public relations programs, retain power by convincing society that the institution is using power responsibly.

So the correct answer is B.