Smith says that criminals are rational and that they consider both the benefits and costs of criminal activity.Jones disagrees.He says criminals are irrational and can't possibly be considering both the benefits and costs of criminal activity.If they did,he argues,they wouldn't be criminals.An economist who wants to figure out if criminals are rational,would most likely build a
A) falsifiable theory built on a rational criminal and then test the theory.
B) non-falsifiable theory built on a rational criminal and then test the theory.
C) falsifiable theory built on a rational criminal,but not test the theory.
D) non-falsifiable theory built on a rational criminal,but not test the theory.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The economist would most likely build a falsifiable theory based on the assumption that criminals are rational and then test the theory to see if it aligns with the evidence. While Jones may argue that criminals are irrational, it is important for the economist to develop a theory based on empirical evidence rather than personal opinions. Additionally, assuming that criminals are rational does not necessarily imply that they are not criminals - it simply means that they are making calculated decisions based on weighing the benefits and costs of their actions.

Smith Says That Criminals Are Rational and That They Consider