To qualify as a medical specialist

Answer choices

1. A

   Out of Scope: highly motivated1% picked this

   People who are not highly motivated will not complete the demanding course of study and examination required to become qualified

   We can stop reading this six words in. The argument never discussed anyone's motivation, let alone a specific subcategory, highly motivated. The conclusion is about whether or not someone is competent to practice. Being competent doesn't require being highly motivated.

   1%
2. B

   Out of Scope: most talented1% picked this

   Only the most talented people will successfully complete the rigorous course of study necessary for qualification as

   We can stop reading this five words in. The argument never discussed anyone's talent level, let alone an extreme subset, the most talented people. The conclusion is about whether or not someone is competent. Being competent doesn't require being the most talented.

   1%
3. C

   Correct72% picked this

   No one incompetent to practice a particular specialty completes the evaluation program

   Why this is right

   When Necessary Assumption questions have conditional logic in them, we usually want to diagram them (often we'll need to contrapose them) and see if they match a reasoning move the author made. This one requires a negative to positive translation: No A's are B = All A's are ~B (A ? ~B) Incompetent to ? Doesn't complete practice specialty eval program For correct answers, we usually have to contrapose it, because they hide its appeal by presenting it in contrapositive form. Does complete Competent to eval program ? practice specialty Did our author make that reasoning move? Yes! That's how she goes from the 2nd to the 3rd sentence. When we combine this answer with the 2nd sentence, we build the logic path the Conclusion is claiming exists. Evidence + Assumption Qualified completed competent as recog -----> eval prog -----> to practice med spec for specialty specialty

   Skill tested: Necessary Assumption · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   72%
4. D

   Too Strong: sufficient14% picked this

   Usually, six to ten years of medical training beyond a university degree is sufficient to render someone competent to practice in

   The author doesn't need to think that the first sentence (6-10 years is coming from 4 yrs of med school + 2-6 years of residency) is enough to already qualify as competent. She declares that a recognized specialist will always be competent, but she hasn't commented at all on what percentage of regular medical specialists can be counted on to be confident.

   14%
5. E

   Too Strong: necessary12% picked this

   Usually, six to ten years of medical training beyond a university degree is necessary to render someone competent to practice in

   Although this appeals to common sense -- it felt like the educational trajectory described in the first sentence was like some chain of requirements -- nothing in the argument said anything in the first sentence was necessary. The conclusion is about recognized specialists, and the only thing we are told is required of recognized specialists is that they complete an evaluation program in their specialty. Another way to detect that this answer is wrong is that by negating it, we'd be saying that "usually people don't need 6-10 years to be competent. People who have studied less than that are usually competent." That wouldn't hurt the author's conclusion at all. The more competent people there are, the more likely the author's conclusion is true. We could only hurt this argument by pointing to the existence of incompetent recognized specialists.

   12%