Logical Reasoning

PT155 · S2 · Q17 Psychiatrist: Psychological stress is known

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

  • Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

Psychiatrist: Psychological stress is known both to cause negative emotions and to impair physical health.

Conclusion

Overcoming negative emotions could cause one's health to improve.

Evidence

Psychological stress is known both to cause negative emotions and to impair physical health.

Evaluate

Normally, when we see a causal conclusion, there was a correlation between X and Y in the evidence. The author overconfidently concludes that X causes Y, and we consider alternate explanations such as, - Reverse Causality (maybe Y causes X?) - Third Factor (maybe X and Y are both caused by Z?)

In this argument, though, the evidence also had a causal claim. It's almost as though this argument started by establishing that there is a Third Factor, Z, psychological stress, that causes X and Y (negative emotions and impaired physical health).

The author bizarrely assumes that X causes Y, out of this love triangle.

Goal

We could point out that the author's thinking,

We could raise an objection that,

17.

The psychiatrist's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which one of the following grounds?

  1. It presumes without justification that

    Bad Premise Match

    This is very close, but the two conditions (negative emotions and impaired physical health) are not conditions that together have a certain effect. Instead, they are both effects of the same cause. This answer is saying "since negative emotions combined with bad health, often result in psychological stress, overcoming negative emotions could cause improved health."

    4% picked this

  2. Correct

    It presumes, merely on the

    Why this is right

    Any answer structured, "Presumes, merely on the basis of X, that Y", makes us check whether X matches the evidence and Y matches the conclusion. Was the premise that two conditions have a common cause? Yes. Negative emotions and bad physical health are both caused by psychological stress. Does the conclusion act like one of those two conditions can causally influence the other? Yes. The conclusion says that getting rid of negative emotions could cause one's health to improve.

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

    77% picked this

  3. It confuses two causes that

    Wrong Flaw

    When we see "necessary", "sufficient", or any synonyms for those ideas, they're talking about the famous Necessary vs. Sufficient flaw, which is when the author presents a conditional statement in the premise and then applies it in some illegal Backwards or Opposite fashion to derive her conclusion. Any time we see this answer choice, we should just ask ourselves, "Was there any conditional logic?" If not, it's wrong. If so, it's right 95% of the time. There was no conditional logic in this paragraph.

    4% picked this

  4. It takes for granted that

    Bad Premise/Conclusion Match

    This breaks for the same initial reason that (A) did. Do we have two conditions that together have a certain effect? Nope. Negative emotions and impaired physical health are not conditions that together have a certain effect. Instead, they are both effects of the same cause. The second half of this answer is also a mismatch, but we needn't read that far to get rid of it.

    2% picked this

  5. It takes for granted that

    Too Strong: suffices to eliminate

    Saying that "the author takes for granted that X suffices to do Y" makes it seem like X should match evidence and Y should match conclusion. The conclusion is saying that removing the condition of negative emotions could cause one's health to improve. It never says "it suffices (guarantees)" to eliminate the latter condition.

    14% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free