The Inference to the Best Explanation (IBE) argument for the existence of other minds is a philosophical reasoning that aims to establish that other minds exist based on the best available explanation for our observations of behavior in others. The argument might be formulated as follows:
- I observe behaviors in others (such as speaking, laughing, crying, etc.) that in my own case are associated with particular mental states (such as happiness, sadness, etc.).
- The best explanation for these observed behaviors is that they are caused by similar mental states in others.
- Therefore, I infer that other minds exist.
When it comes to formulating philosophical arguments, there isn't really such a thing as an "official" formulation. Philosophy is a discourse, and different thinkers may present different formulations of the same basic arguments. Some versions might be more rigorous or detailed than others, but that doesn't make them more "official."
What matters in philosophy is not whether an argument is official, but whether it is valid and sound. A valid argument is one where if the premises are true, the conclusion must necessarily be true. A sound argument is a valid argument with true premises.
Using different versions of the argument can be useful for understanding different aspects of it, or for presenting it in a way that is more accessible to different audiences. So no, it would not be irrational to use unofficial versions of the argument. However, it's always a good idea to be clear about what version of an argument you're using and why.