- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 8917
- Joined: Feb 02, 2011
- Wed Sep 07, 2016 8:54 am
#28391
Complete Question Explanation
Assumption. The correct answer choice is (C)
The author enumerates the requirements for qualifying as a medical specialist, and then mentions an additional requirement for qualifying as a recognized medical specialist. On that basis, she concludes that anyone who qualifies as a recognized medical specialist is competent to practice in his or her specialty.
As you mentioned, the argument contains conditional reasoning, which we can diagram as follows:
We can also determine the correct answer by the process of elimination. First, if you see a new or “rogue” element in the conclusion (“competent to practice”), look for a Supporter assumption that connects the new element to the rest of the argument. This eliminates answer choices (A) and (B), because neither of them mentions that element. Second, note that the first sentence of the stimulus has no bearing on the rest of the argument, because the conclusion talks specifically about recognized medical specialists, not medical specialists in general. Since not every medical specialist is necessarily a recognized medical specialist, none of the requirements for qualifying as a medical specialist have any bearing on the issue of whether recognized specialists are competent to practice in their field. This observation should help eliminate answer choices (D) and (E).
Answer choice (A): This answer choice can be immediately eliminated because it does not address the issue of competency. Also, the argument need not make any assumptions about whether qualifying as a recognized medical specialist requires being “highly motivated.” When answering assumption questions, avoid introducing claims that fall outside the scope of the argument.
Answer choice (B): As with answer choice (A), this one fails to connect the new element in the conclusion (“competent to practice”) to the rest of the argument. Furthermore, the argument need not make any assumptions about whether qualifying as a recognized medical specialist requires talent.
Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer choice, as it properly connects the necessary condition in the premise to that in the conclusion. The claim contains a double negative, and is more easily understood in its contrapositive form:
We can also prove that answer choice (C) contains an assumption by using the Assumption Negation Technique, as the logical opposite of the correct answer choice must weaken the conclusion:
Answer choice (D): Having six to ten years of medical training beyond college is a qualifying requirement for medical specialists in general, not for recognized medical specialists in particular. Since the conclusion makes an assertion about recognized medical specialists, no assumption has been made about whether medical training is sufficient to render someone competent to practice in his or her specialty. To test if answer choice (D) contains an assumption, apply the Assumption Negation Technique and ask yourself, “What would the author say to this negation?”
Answer choice (E): As with answer choice (D), the qualifying requirements for medical specialists have no bearing on the issue of whether recognized medical specialists are competent to practice medicine. This observation alone suffices to eliminate answer choice (E). Additionally, the conditions necessary to qualify as a medical specialist may not identical to those necessary for someone to be competent in his or her field. Indeed, it is entirely possible that people other than recognized medical specialists are competent to practice medicine: there is no evidence that only recognized specialists are competent to do so.
Assumption. The correct answer choice is (C)
The author enumerates the requirements for qualifying as a medical specialist, and then mentions an additional requirement for qualifying as a recognized medical specialist. On that basis, she concludes that anyone who qualifies as a recognized medical specialist is competent to practice in his or her specialty.
As you mentioned, the argument contains conditional reasoning, which we can diagram as follows:
- Premise: Medical Specialist
Graduate from college AND Complete med school (4 yrs) AND Residency (2-6 yrs)
Premise: Recognized Medical Specialist Complete evaluation
===============
Conclusion: Recognized Medical Specialist Competent to practice
- Assumption: Complete evaluation Competent to practice
We can also determine the correct answer by the process of elimination. First, if you see a new or “rogue” element in the conclusion (“competent to practice”), look for a Supporter assumption that connects the new element to the rest of the argument. This eliminates answer choices (A) and (B), because neither of them mentions that element. Second, note that the first sentence of the stimulus has no bearing on the rest of the argument, because the conclusion talks specifically about recognized medical specialists, not medical specialists in general. Since not every medical specialist is necessarily a recognized medical specialist, none of the requirements for qualifying as a medical specialist have any bearing on the issue of whether recognized specialists are competent to practice in their field. This observation should help eliminate answer choices (D) and (E).
Answer choice (A): This answer choice can be immediately eliminated because it does not address the issue of competency. Also, the argument need not make any assumptions about whether qualifying as a recognized medical specialist requires being “highly motivated.” When answering assumption questions, avoid introducing claims that fall outside the scope of the argument.
Answer choice (B): As with answer choice (A), this one fails to connect the new element in the conclusion (“competent to practice”) to the rest of the argument. Furthermore, the argument need not make any assumptions about whether qualifying as a recognized medical specialist requires talent.
Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer choice, as it properly connects the necessary condition in the premise to that in the conclusion. The claim contains a double negative, and is more easily understood in its contrapositive form:
- Original claim: Competent to practice Complete evaluation
Contrapositive: Complete evaluation Competent to practice
- Recognized Medical Specialist Complete evaluation Competent to practice
We can also prove that answer choice (C) contains an assumption by using the Assumption Negation Technique, as the logical opposite of the correct answer choice must weaken the conclusion:
Logical Opposite of answer choice (C):If true, this assertion would show that completing the evaluation program is not sufficient to render someone competent to practice medicine, directly undermining the conclusion of the argument.
Some of those who complete the evaluation program for their specialty are NOT competent to practice in it.
Answer choice (D): Having six to ten years of medical training beyond college is a qualifying requirement for medical specialists in general, not for recognized medical specialists in particular. Since the conclusion makes an assertion about recognized medical specialists, no assumption has been made about whether medical training is sufficient to render someone competent to practice in his or her specialty. To test if answer choice (D) contains an assumption, apply the Assumption Negation Technique and ask yourself, “What would the author say to this negation?”
Logical Opposite of answer choice (D):This claim clearly does not weaken the conclusion, because the author never claimed that medical training alone is a sufficient to ensure competence.
Usually, six to ten years of medical training beyond a university degree is not sufficient to render someone competent to practice in his or her medical specialty.
Answer choice (E): As with answer choice (D), the qualifying requirements for medical specialists have no bearing on the issue of whether recognized medical specialists are competent to practice medicine. This observation alone suffices to eliminate answer choice (E). Additionally, the conditions necessary to qualify as a medical specialist may not identical to those necessary for someone to be competent in his or her field. Indeed, it is entirely possible that people other than recognized medical specialists are competent to practice medicine: there is no evidence that only recognized specialists are competent to do so.
