Q19 - Physician: Hatha yoga is a

[noah]

The conclusion of this argument is that the yoga is a powerful tool. Why? Because a group that used it, along with counseling, reduced their smoking (to paraphrase) as much as a different group that did self-help groups as well as the counseling.

We're looking for a necessary assumption, so we should look for gaps. Right off the bat, were either of these groups successful? Maybe they both didn't quit that much! (C) deals with this in an unexpected way. If the traditional self-help group is a powerful method, then a different method that achieves the same level of efficacy is also powerful. Notice how (C) focuses on the traditional self help group. What if we negate (C) and say that the traditional self help group is not powerful? Then, why is that second, non-yoga group quitting smoking (if they are at all)? Either they're not quitting smoking or the real reason for their quitting is the individual counseling. Either way, the conclusion is disturbed (either the supposedly effective yoga method is equally effective as an ineffective one, or, if the individual counseling is the real reason, then why would we conclude it's the yoga that does it?).

(A) looks very tempting. We might think "A-ha! It might be the counseling that does it, not the yoga!" However, we don't need it to be true that the individual counseling had no effect. We just need it to not to primarily account for any powerful efficacy. It could help a little bit, but the yoga (and the traditional self-help group stuff) need to be the real powerhouses in the treatment. So, (A) is too strong to be a required assumption for this argument. (And it wouldn't work as a sufficient one either - can you figure out why?)

(B) is out of scope - we're not interested in whether the treatment fits into folks' schedules.
(D) is tempting, but the argument is only about smoking, not about overall health.
(E) is similarly out of scope - we aren't concerned with whether hatha yoga is the only yoga that works.

[perng.yan]

i see the reasoning behind why (B) is correct, but could you please elaborate more on why (A) is wrong? "did not help" seems to be the same thing as "wasn't the thing that made them quit smoking"

[noah]

Thanks for the question. I went back and edited my original explanation - I think it was a bit off. Is it clearer now?

[geordan]

The evidence states that in both examples, individual counseling is one of two sufficient conditions that results in an equivalent reduction of smoking. Thus increasing the power of counseling alone does not necessarily reduce the affectiveness of yoga as a tool. Counseling may very well have been instrumental in helping the smokers to quit, but that may have been because they talked about yoga. There is no evidence that allows us to speak to the power of counseling without yoga, or to diminish the affects of yoga without counseling.

[perng.yan]

thanks guys. i hate it when i miss a point like that and believe strongly in another answer choice. i don't really know how to "improve" on this error though...

[noah]

What we stress in our courses is

1. boiling down these arguments to their core (P --> C)

2. identifying the gap

3. evaluate the answer choices, working wrong-to-right.

and, with necessary assumptions, if you're down to two answer choices, bust out the negation test. the correct answer, when negated, will destroy the argument.

If you're not using those steps, try it out on some questions you've already done, then apply to new ones.

Good luck!

[jamiejames]

If Hatha yoga was is a powerful tool for helping people quit smoking, and is as useful as traditional self-help groups, then if you negate (c) and say traditional self-helps groups are not powerful tools for helping people quit smoking, then Hatha yoga is not a powerful tool as it says in the conclusion, because it helped as much, not more than, traditional self-help groups.

[syr1990]

(A) looks very tempting. We might think "A-ha! It might be the counseling that does it, not the yoga!" However, we don't need it to be true that the individual counseling had no effect. We just need it to not to primarily account for any powerful efficacy. It could help a little bit, but the yoga (and the traditional self-help group stuff) need to be the real powerhouses in the treatment. So, (A) is too strong to be a required assumption for this argument. (And it wouldn't work as a sufficient one either - can you figure out why?)

Could A not be a sufficient answer because it leaves the possibility of the traditional self-groups not helping very much and therefore the yoga not being "powerful"?

[noah]

(A) looks very tempting. We might think "A-ha! It might be the counseling that does it, not the yoga!" However, we don't need it to be true that the individual counseling had no effect. We just need it to not to primarily account for any powerful efficacy. It could help a little bit, but the yoga (and the traditional self-help group stuff) need to be the real powerhouses in the treatment. So, (A) is too strong to be a required assumption for this argument. (And it wouldn't work as a sufficient one either - can you figure out why?)

Could A not be a sufficient answer because it leaves the possibility of the traditional self-groups not helping very much and therefore the yoga not being "powerful"?

Nice!

Another way to phrase this is that maybe nobody quit smoking in the two groups!

[WaltGrace1983]

This is a super interesting argument. I like it and I break down what I like (it doesn't bode well in my social life ).

(Yoga + Individual Counseling) is just as effective as (Self-Help + Individual Counseling) in helping people quit smoking
→
Yoga is a powerful tool for helping people quit smoking

The LSAT wants us to look at this argument by realizing that "Individual Counseling" in the first group and "Individual Counseling" in the second group counteract each other. Clearly, if both groups are taking Individual Counseling and the argument is concluding something about the Yoga, we don't need to worry about the Individual Counseling! As I said, they neutralize each other because we are concluding something about what is available only in one group. Thus, we can more or less examine the core like the following:

Yoga is just as effective as Self-Help in helping people quit smoking
→
Yoga is a powerful tool for helping people quit smoking

The gap here is now obvious. Just because something is JUST AS EFFECTIVE does it mean that something is a POWERFUL TOOL? Drinking coffee with a fork is just as effective as drinking coffee with an oven mitt. Clearly, a fork is an effective tool for drinking coffee, right? Absolutely not. This is exactly what (C) states.

(A) is the tricky one. Why is (A) tricky? It is tricky because - as Noah said - it really feeds on our expectations regarding an assumption about the individual counseling. However, the individual counseling can definitely help! That is no problem because it is going to help just as much and, either way, we are only focusing on the yoga and the self-help.

(B) (D) and (E) are just simply out of scope.

[pa.perezelias]

It might be easy to look at it like a math equation, almost. How I pictured it.

Yoga + Individual Counseling = Self-Help Group + Individual Counseling

Individual counseling is something that both have in common so you can subtract it from both sides of the equation so:

Yoga = Self Help Group

We are told in the first sentence that Yoga is a powerful tool. Therefore, if Self-Help Group = Yoga = Powerful Tool, Self-Help Group = Powerful Tool.

[MichaelS731]

This is a phenomenally explanatory question, but for a different reason than so far is discussed. This is an example of a flawed LSAT question without a valid correct answer, that so far seems to have gone unnoticed.

The explanations for why A is incorrect are valid, A is clearly not a correct answer. What is more fascinating is that C, also clearly, is not a necessary assumption.

What is a necessary assumption again? Something the author absolutely needs to be true for the argument to be valid. The author would need to say "yes that has to be true". There is no way around it.

C fails because the LSAT was trying to play it a little too clever, which they usually do rather well, but not here.

The negation of C would NOT necessarily weaken the author's argument. Nor would the author have to say that it is true. The author's argument as stated by multiple commentators relies on two prongs in both parts of the argument. 1) Yoga and individual counseling. 2) Self help and individual counseling.

Let's leave out mythical analysis and attempts to break down the argument and just recapture exactly what the author said to fully capture the error, not in the argument (which there are many), but in the attempt to make C the correct answer.

Those who received Hatha yoga once a week and received individual counseling reduced their cravings just as much as "those who went to traditional self help groups once a week and had individual counseling." So..... Hatha yoga is a "powerful tool."

What would NEED to be true for the argument to hold?

That traditional self help is a powerful tool? Hardly, at all. Just say it back to the author. "Hey stupid, traditional self help is not a powerful tool to stop people from smoking."

"That's fine, I know its not. I never said it was. The powerful combination of traditional self help combined with individual counseling is the powerful tool. I clearly said traditional self help AND individual counseling.

By trying to throw in this "individual counseling" in both parts of the argument (presumedly to complicate the argument), they also changed the nature of the necessary assumptions the author is making.

The author does not assume that self help alone is a powerful tool.

This can not be explained away by question hedging, as in we are to pick the "most" strengthening answer, etc. The question asks to pick an assumption that is necessary. There is no wiggle room.

The author would have to assume that both self help and individual counseling together constitute a powerful tool as that is the base of comparison to yoga and individual counseling. The author does not have to assume that self help groups alone are a powerful tool. The role that individual counseling (which has been explored prior to this) plays is not stated in either prong, and the LSAC used this to lure test takers to select A, but in so doing, forgot to actually put a necessary assumption in C.

I wonder if anyone will retroactively fight for a point. I get 10% commission.