#19 - Physician: Hatha yoga is a powerful tool for helping

[KoenXin]

I got this wrong, picking A instead of the correct answer C. I've already watched two video explanations of this question and don't feel 100% satisfied with them in my understanding.

So my breakdown was:

Premise: In a trial, those who practiced Hatha yoga for 75 mins once a week + recieved counseling reduced their smoking and cravings for tobacco as much as did those who went to traditional self-help groups once a week and had individual counseling.

Conclusion: Hatha yoga is a powerful tool for helping people quit smoking.

The issue with this stimulus is the assumption that with both groups having a similar variable (Individual Counseling) and one differing variable mentioned, that the differing variable must also be effective since if not, then the Individual Counseling clearly played a large role in helping them quit smoking, thus weakening the argument that the differing variable was powerful.

Now admittedly, this is the part I had the biggest struggle with on the question. This wasn't apparent to me the first time around, I had thought that the Individual Counseling must not play as big of a part since both groups are using it along with a different factor. I would really appreciate a better explanation if possible for why an answer like C) should jump out to me as being the assumption.

[Adam Tyson]

I see the path you went down, KoenXin, and it's not a bad path, Many arguments are built on multiple assumptions, and certainly this author has to be assuming that individual counseling is not the only thing that led to these people to reduced cravings. But that doesn't commit the author to the extreme claim that counseling did NOTHING. That is a pretty big leap! Imagine the negation of that answer, that individual counseling did help at least a little bit. That doesn't ruin this argument, so A is not a required assumption of the argument.

Since the author is comparing the yoga group to the traditional group, saying they got similar results, and since the author is saying that the yoga must be a big help, the author has to believe that the traditional path is also a big help. Otherwise, why would a similar result tell us anything? This would be like me saying "I got lap band surgery and a magic decoder ring, while my friend got lap band surgery and a lucky rabbit's foot, and we both lost the same amount of weight, so my magic decoder ring must be a great tool for losing weight!" Maybe the ring and rabbit's foot didn't have anything to do with it?

Now try the Negation Technique on answer C: what if traditional self help programs aren't very useful? Would "yoga got the same results as a useless alternative" support that yoga is very helpful? Not a bit - it becomes a magic decoder ring, ruining the argument and proving that C IS a necessary assumption for this argument to make any sense.

[KoenXin]

Thank you for the explanation, its been pretty helpful. Just to make sure I understand correctly and I sort of see this now that I've looked back over it later. Answer C is essentially the "corollary" to what the conclusion is saying. We know both groups had IC with a differing variable (Hatha yoga, and self-help groups), so if Hatha yoga is effective as a conclusion, then self-help groups would also need to be effective or else the argument wouldn't really make much sense. Why argue that its effective if you can't prove the other groups differing factor also played a role, it seems like it would break the connection between the two groups the author is trying to mention.

[Jeremy Press]

Hi KoenXin,

Yes, you've got it! And, in a general sense for a future question, remember that if an argument relies on a comparison like this one does, then one necessary assumption is that the two things being compared are similar in the ways that matter to the conclusion for the argument (here, that they're similar in how powerful they are).

Jeremy