Passage Summary: One theory says people vote based on their own wallets. Many sociologists disagree, claiming you can't explain something as complicated as a political party using a reason as simple as individual greed.

Reasoning: Rational-choice theory posits that individual economic decisions explain political support, but sociologists argue that complex phenomena cannot be explained by simple phenomena.

Analysis: This is a formal logic puzzle disguised as a sociology debate. We are looking for a deduction based on the sociologists' specific objection. If sociologists believe that a complex phenomenon (like a political organization) cannot be caused by a simple phenomenon, and they are using this to oppose rational-choice theory, they must believe that individual economic decisions are 'simple.' Therefore, they would conclude that these simple decisions are insufficient to explain the rise of political parties. Look for an answer that bridges the gap between 'simple causes' and 'complex effects' as the sociologists see them.