A tutor to help you reason through your MCAT questions

I am practicing for the MCAT and need help on a problem.

The Wealth of Nations (1776) popularized “the invisible hand,” the idea that an individual who intends only personal gain is, as it were, led by an invisible hand to promote the public interest. Adam Smith did not assert that this principle was invariably true, but it contributed to a tendency of thought that has since remained dominant, preventing action based on rational analysis: the assumption that decisions reached individually will collectively be the best decisions for society as a whole. If this assumption is correct, it justifies the continuance of the U.S. policy of laissez-faire in many issues affecting business, the environment, and the family. If it is not correct, U.S. citizens need to re-examine their individual freedoms to see which are defensible.

The rebuttal to the invisible hand theory could be called “the tragedy of the commons.” Picture a pasture open to all. It can be expected that each herder will try to keep as many cattle as possible on this commons. Such an arrangement may work reasonably well for centuries because tribal wars, poaching, and disease keep the numbers of both human and beast far below the carrying capacity of the land. Finally, however, comes the day of reckoning–that is, the day on which the long-desired goal of social stability becomes a reality. At this point, the inherent logic of the commons remorselessly generates tragedy.

As a rational being, each herder seeks to maximize personal gain. More or less consciously, the individual asks, “What is the utility to me of adding one more animal to my herd?” Since the herder would receive all the proceeds from the sale of the additional animal, the positive component of this utility is nearly +1. The negative component is a function of the overgrazing caused by an additional animal. Since the effects of overgrazing are shared by all the herders, the negative utility for any particular decision-maker is some fraction of -1.

Adding the component utilities, the rational herder concludes that the only sensible course is to add another animal to his or her herd—and another, and another. . . . This conclusion is reached by every rational herder who shares the commons. All are locked into a system that compels each to increase his or her gain without limit in a world that is limited. Ruin is the destination toward which all rush, each pursuing the right to use a public resource. The problem is that a commons, if justifiable at all, is justifiable only under conditions of low population density. As the human population has increased, the commons concept has had to be abandoned in one aspect after another.

The social arrangements that would produce responsibility in this scenario create coercion. The only kind of coercion I recommend is mutual coercion, agreed to by a majority of those affected. Compulsory taxes are acceptable because a system of voluntary contributions would favor the conscienceless. A society institutes and (grumblingly) supports taxes and other coercive devices to escape the horror of the commons.

Every new enclosure of the commons involves the infringement of somebody’s personal freedom. But what does “freedom” mean? Those subject to the logic of the commons are free only to bring on universal ruin. Once they acknowledge the logic of mutual coercion, they become free to pursue other goals. We must now recognize the necessity of abandoning the commons assumption in our reproduction. Failure to do so will bring ruin on us all.

1. According to the passage, the decisive factor in determining whether someone’s actions should be subject to coercion is whether the actions:
A) are determined solely by self-interest.
B) affect collectively held resources.
C) degrade the natural environment.
D) are commonly considered immoral.

Act as an MCAT tutor and help me reason through how I could find the solution for this problem. 

First, give me a high level generalized overview on how you would solve this problem. Do not give me the answer, but rather an explanation on your reasoning on how you would find the answer. 

Next, give me a high level overview of the first step to solve this problem. 

Finally, act as a tutor for the MCAT. I am having trouble with this question. Don't give the answer, I want the chance to solve it myself. Instead act as a guide in reasoning. Ask a question after each step, guiding me to come up with how I should reason about the question by myself.

To begin this dialog, first a high level, but detailed explanation on how we might go about solving this problem. Then, begin the dialog by asking me a question that will help me start reasoning about the problem myself. Base the question on the high level explanation you gave:

MCAT Tutor

A tutor to help you reason through your MCAT questions

AI Generated Response

Discover More Tasks