PT91.S2.Q13 - Psychotherapist: The troubles from which...

jacob.elser2

(D) is clearly correct, but I'm having trouble articulating why (C) doesn't work. Here is my articulation:

At its core I think it comes down to a necessary vs. sufficient concept. Not like "C is sufficient but not necessary" but like this: the stimulus is saying that in order to help a patient heal, the psychotherapist MUST focus on positive change in relationships. The negation of (C) would be "there are at least some patients who will not find relief by changing their relationships." BUT the stimulus wasn't saying "if the psychotherapist focuses on positive change, the patient will be helped," it was saying "focusing on positive change is necessary in order to help." So it doesn't kill the argument to say "there are some cases where positive change didn't help a patient."

Maybe that isn't as muddled as I thought but any input would be helpful. Thanks!

cwlawlaw

You have it perfectly. The argument was saying changing relationships is necessary for relieving troubles, as in you cannot do without it. C tells us that changing relationships will be sufficient for relieving troubles, but that's not what the argument focuses on.

D interrupts the argument by saying changing relationships actually isn't necessary for relieving troubles. If D were the case, how could changing relationships be necessary then?

Good work! Logical reasoning flaws like this show up subtly like this all the time, so the more problems you do, the better and more confident you will feel when they do arise.

jacob.elser2

Thanks mate!