#17 - When exercising the muscles in one’s back, it is

[ltowns1]

The very last part of the argument seems to always distract when I look at this question. (Since the muscles on opposite sides of the spine must pull equally…) I know it was asked before but just for some clarity, you could’ve connected the ideas of proper alignment +protecting the spine to balanced muscle development. I get that typically it’s gonna be the premise +conclusion, but those ideas could've worked too correct?

[Robert Carroll]

ltowns1,

It's extremely difficult to predict what would have happened if the answers were different from what they are. The only guess I'd venture is that such a connection would be fine, but it seems to already be common sense - balanced muscle development should by definition lead to the ability to pull equally in both directions, I think? But again, we can deal only with the test as written, and this idea never came up in any answer.

Robert Carroll

[Asal1998]

Hi there!

How would I know that answer B can be diagrammed as a conditional? "Tends to lead to" indicates a causal relationship, and I've been cautious not to mix the two.

Apologies if this is a simple question! Just starting taking practice tests to there's a lot to catch up one

Thank you!

[Luke Haqq]

Hi Asal1998!

A causal relationship can be represented using conditional reasoning. Regarding how you can know that answer choice (B) can be diagrammed conditionally, the language "lead to" is an indication that it is a statement about one thing causing another. The cause would go on the left side of the arrow as the sufficient condition, and the effect would be on the right side as the necessary condition.

[ashpine17]

How do you know healthy back and proper alignment are similar enough to not be considered rogue elements? And how would i connect opposite sifes equally and balanced muscle development because i ended up getting the negation of the correct answer chouce so i must be linking it incorrectly

[Jeff Wren]

Hi ashpine,

First, it's important to note that the first sentence of the stimulus is the conclusion. It basically contains two terms "maintaining a healthy back" and "exercising the muscles on opposite sides equally." The second one is not mentioned anywhere else in the argument, so this is new information in the conclusion that will likely appear in our answer to a Supporter Assumption question.

The first term, "maintaining a healthy back" does appear again in the second sentence. This sentence links "maintaining a healthy back" to "balanced muscle development."

It is true that the argument assumes a connection between "proper alignment and protecting the spine" and "maintaining healthy back," and the answer could have addressed this assumption, but instead the answer focused on the gap between "exercising the muscles on opposite sides equally" and "balanced muscle development" that occurs in the conclusion of the argument.

Remember that arguments often contain multiple assumptions, but only one will appear as the correct answer. If you prephrase an assumption and it doesn't appear as an answer choice, that doesn't necessarily mean that your prephrase was incorrect. It may be that the answer just focuses on a different assumption.

As Francis stated in an earlier post (Post #6):

"Since the author is apparently assuming that balanced muscle development requires exercising muscles on either side equally, the argument must assume that not exercising muscles equally can lead to unbalanced muscles. If the author did not believe this, then there would be no reason to conclude that we need to exercise both sides equally."

While there is conditional reasoning in the stimulus, personally I wouldn't bother diagramming this out. I would simply note the new information in the conclusion "exercising the muscles on opposite sides equally" and think about how that term relates to the rest of the argument, which is that it should connect to "balanced muscle development."

Using the Assumption Negation Technique on Answer B confirms this is the correct answer. (And the fact that this answer is not technically conditional due to the word "tends" does not really matter, it is still a statement that the argument is assuming.)

[rdentlyyours]

In sufficient assumption questions i see diagramming similar to necessary assumption questions like these with these rogue elements id there any overlap in approach and the question type or are these just symbolic similarities for the sake of standardizing how we represent the conditional ststements

[rdentlyyours]

Im asking because i used to be able to get by by just identifying the new elements thst pop up and chopsing the choice that has them but on more recent questions they sometimes have two answers that contain the new elements and they just chsnge the order up which makes choosing very difficult. For me i thought exercising on opposite sides being necessary foe balanced muscle development makes more sense than the other way around since i think one can exercise muscles on opposite sides without needing balanced muscle developmeny just based off of intuition but is that the correct way to do things i see no formula

[Jeff Wren]

Hi rdentlyyours,

The reason that this question can be diagrammed (and that diagramming it can be helpful), is that it contains conditional reasoning. While conditional reasoning often appears in Justify questions (what some people call sufficient assumption questions), it can appear in many other LR question types, including Assumption questions (what some people call necessary assumption questions) like this one.

Diagramming is a tool that can be very helpful with conditional reasoning questions, especially the more complex ones. The test makers know that people often make mistakes in their understanding of the conditional relationships, especially if they try to keep track of everything in their heads.

My advice to is diagram every LR question that features conditional reasoning, at least at first. It's a good habit to develop and will help improve your speed/accuracy with diagramming. Later, you may decide that you don't need to diagram some of the easier/more strait-forward conditional questions.

As far as rogue elements, you always want to note when the conclusion of an argument contains "new" information as part of your general analysis of the stimulus, no matter what type of LR question is being asked.

And while the new information will likely be in the correct answer to these supporter type questions (which usually can help you narrow down your answer choices), it is critical that you get the order correct.