Not necessary, because motivation is irrelevant the reasoning. The argument is based on the fact that becoming a recognized specialist requires completing an evaluation program. We have no reason to think that being motivated has any relationship to completing the evaluation program. (Don’t bring in unwarranted assumptions about the relationship between motivation and completing programs required to become a doctor.)

Not necessary, becaue the concept of talent is irrelevant to the reasoning. The argument is based on the fact that becoming a recognized specialist requires completing an evaluation program. We have no reason to think that being talented has any relationship to completing the evaluation program. (Don’t bring in unwarranted assumptions about the relationship between talent and completing programs required to become a doctor.)

Necessary, because if it were not true — if SOME people who are incompetent to practice their specialty can complete the evaluation program — then we have no reason to think that anyone who is qualified as a recognized specialist must be competent. Some of those people might have passed the evaluation program while being INCOMPETENT.

Not necessary, because the 6 to 10 year time frame covers med school followed by a residency. But it’s not clear whether the evaluation program required to be a recognized specialist is also part of the 6 to 10 year time frame. The argument is not undermined if the evaluation program requires extra time beyond residency.

Not necessary, because the argument concerns what is SUFFICIENT to prove that someone is competent. It doesn’t concern what is NECESSARY to make someone competent. If it turns out that someone can become competent without any medical training or university, that doesn’t undermine the author’s argument.