PT70.S4.Q10 - a recent study showed that people

westcoastbestcoast

For this particular problem, I see how the author is making the link between stress and the way people approach and think about their problems. The correct answer choice states that refusing to think about something troubling contributes to stress, which captures this idea. However, I'm wondering why the relationship couldn't be reversed, with the refusal to think being a result rather than the cause of stress. Even after BR and reviewing the explanation, I understood that there was being link between those two concepts but didn't fully understand the direction of that causal link because the stimulus was so odd.
https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-70-section-4-question-10/

Frostbyte

Sometimes the correct answer is not bullet-proof. In those cases, it's only correct because all the other ones are clearly wrong. If there was a better AC, this might not have been the right answer.

Remind me---was this strengthen or explain the discrepancy?

S.P. 170

Did it say "stress" or "high stress"? The LSAT has a few questions on stress, and the answer is often distinguishing high levels of stress from normal levels of stress. Not sure if that's applicable here.

westcoastbestcoast

@Frostbyte It was a an Necessary Assumption question. I can see how your line of reasoning applies to other question types but would it apply to this one?

@"S.P. 170", it doesnt make a distinction between the levels of stress

Frostbyte

No, you're right, it does not apply here---you need to use the negation test for NA questions.

So here, if you negate the AC: refusing to think about something troubling DOES NOT contribute to stress, then it wrecks the argument in the stimulus, which is why this assumption is necessary to the argument.

The relationship can be reversed, of course. The test writers just chose not to include it in the ACs. Since I don't have the stimulus in front of me, I'm not sure if it will still be a NA though. Could you restate the causal chain you think could have worked as an AC here?

westcoastbestcoast

Hey @Frostbyte, reversingthe causal chain would effectively mean that Stress would influence the way people think (making them less inclined to think about something troubling). With premise that tells us that stress causes immune system suppression, we would know the stress would therefore be causally linked to the immune system suppression and making people less inclined to think about something troubling