Traditional "talk" therapy, in which a patient with a psychological disorder discusses it with a trained therapist, p...

Ravi on March 9, 2020

@Shafieiava,

Let's look at (D) and (B). This is a strengthen with a necessary
premise question, so we can use the negation test to pick the right
answer. The correct answer, when negated, will wreck the argument.

(D) says, "If chemical changes in the brain's neurochemistry
correspond to improvements in patient behavior, then psychology and
neuroscience will eventually be indistinguishable."

(D)'s negation says, "Even if chemical changes in the brain's
neurochemistry correspond to improvements in patient behavior,
psychology and neuroscience might not eventually be
indistinguishable."

(D)'s telling us that eventually, students will not know whether
they're in a psychology or neuroscience class. This is too much to be
necessary for this argument. (D)'s negation doesn't destroy the
argument, so this answer choice is out.

(B) says, "Improvements in a patient's behavior produced by "talk"
therapy occur only through chemical changes in the brain's
neurochemistry."

(B)'s negation would say, "Improvements in a patient's behavior
produced by "talk" therapy can occur through something besides
chemical changes in the brain's neurochemistry."

The wording in (B) is strong, but the argument's conclusion is
claiming that drugs will be able to improve behavior just like
therapy. In order for this to follow, we have to know that the
improvements were caused only by the chemical changes in the brain. If
the improvements were caused by anything else, then the argument falls
apart, as it does with (B)'s negation. Thus, (B) is the correct answer
choice.

Does this make sense? Let us know if you have any other questions!