Question

read the excerpt from levitt and dubners freakonomics. there is a tale, \the ring of gyges,\ that feldman sometimes tells his economist friends. it comes from platos republic. a student named glaucon offered the story in response to a lesson by socrates—who, like adam smith, argued that people are generally good even without enforcement. glaucon, like feldmans economist friends, disagreed. he told of a shepherd named gyges who stumbled upon a secret cavern with a corpse inside that wore a ring. when gyges put on the ring, he found that it made him invisible. with no one able to monitor his behavior, gyges proceeded to do woeful things—seduce the queen, murder the king, and so on. glaucons story posed a moral question: could any man resist the temptation of evil if he knew his acts could not be witnessed? glaucon seemed to think the answer was no. but paul feldman sides with socrates and adam smith—for he knows the answer, at least 87 percent of the time, is yes. the example in the excerpt helps the authors arrive at which of the following conclusions? the majority of people are corrupt. the majority of people are honest. glaucon and paul feldman were wrong. socrates and adam smith were wrong.

Explanation:

The key point is the author's statement "Paul Feldman sides with Socrates and Adam Smith—for he knows the answer, at least 87 percent of the time, is yes." Here, the "yes" refers to the idea that people can resist the temptation of evil (be honest) when not being monitored. 87 percent is a majority. The first option ("The majority of people are corrupt") is contrary to the 87 - percent "yes" (which implies honesty). The third option ("Glaucon and Paul Feldman were wrong") is incorrect as Feldman is on the side of the "yes" (honesty). The fourth option ("Socrates and Adam Smith were wrong") is also wrong because Feldman sides with them.

Answer:

The majority of people are honest.