jabhatta2
Hi
ReedArnoldMPREP – thank you so much. Just wanted to focus on the analogy as I think it is a very good one.
ReedArnoldMPREP
"Steak has a lot of protein, so it is in Reed's best interest to eat lots of steak."
Created analogous choices just to discuss this analogy a bit more.
Argument : Steak has a lot of protein, so it is in Reed's best interest to eat lots of steak
(a) Reed should eat steak if doing so would be in his best interest
(d) Eating steak will help resolve Reed’s protein deficit
(e) Reed will not eat protein if doing so will not allow Reed to cover for his protein deficit
ReedArnoldMPREP
The pertinent question is "Is eating lots of steak in Reed's best interest, since steak has protein?"
The question is NOT: "Should Reed do what is in his best interest?" or "Will Reed do what is in best interest?" So saying "Reed will do what is in his best interest" or "Reed should do what is in his best interest" has no bearing on whether eating lots of steak is in his best interest.
Initially I struggled to parse between the 3 different questions (
Red vs
blue) The 3 questions are essentially the same if you ask me.
Some other questions -
- WILL Reed do what is in Reed's best interest
- COULD Reed do what is in Reed's best interest
- SHOULD Reed do what is in Reed's best interest
- CAN Reed do what is in Reed's best interest
-- all should be "
YES" in order for the conclusion to be given.
------------------------------------------------
With some deeper thinking – I think “
Will / Could / should / can ” strengthen the conclusion
That being said, the most pertinent question in Red (posted above) is not accurate if you ask me
The biggest question is ---
Is eating protein, something to do for Reed’s best interest.I don't know much to say here except keep wrestling with this, because your thinking is confused.
Quote:
Initially I struggled to parse between the 3 different questions (Red vs blue) The 3 questions are essentially the same if you ask me.
Some other questions -
WILL Reed do what is in Reed's best interest
COULD Reed do what is in Reed's best interest
SHOULD Reed do what is in Reed's best interest
CAN Reed do what is in Reed's best interest
-- all should be "YES" in order for the conclusion to be given.
These are all fundamentally different questions (except maybe COULD and CAN? Those seem pretty close to identical.)
None of these need to be 'YES' for the conclusion given (eating steak is in Reed's best interest) to be true.
My suspicion is you are operating under a very understandable, hardwired assumption: "People SHOULD do what is in their best interest."
So if it's in their best interest to eat lots of steak, they SHOULD eat lots of steak. But again, the question is not SHOULD Reed do what is in his best interest, but WHAT ACTUALLY IS IN his best interest.
The question is: "Is it in Reed's best interest to eat lots of steak, or is it in Reed's best interest to NOT eat lots of steak."
That's it. That's the entire question. Whether Reed SHOULD or WILL DO what is in his best interest (whether that's eat lots of steak or NOT eat lots of steak) is another matter entirely, and is out of scope.
Quote:
With some deeper thinking – I think “Will / Could / should / can ” strengthen the conclusion
For the reasons stated just above, none of these are relevant to the argument in question.
Quote:
That being said, the most pertinent question in Red (posted above) is not accurate if you ask me
Keep digging, because that is the most pertinent question (not sure what you mean by 'accurate', though).
Quote:
The biggest question is ---
Is eating protein, something to do for Reed’s best interest.
That's part of it, because if eating protein is not in Reed's best interest than eating steak is not in his best interest. But it's also pertinent to ask if there is a reason eating steak is not in Reed's interest, even though it has a lot of protein (and maybe Reed should eat lots of protein). So if Reed is allergic to cow, eating steak is not in his best interest, even if the protein would be good for him. (This is getting a little away from the main points, though).