Ordinary mountain sickness, a common condition among mountain climbers, and one from which most people can recover, i...

Emil-Kunkin on March 3, 2022

Hi Lex,

This is a strengthen with necessary premise question, so we are looking to find an answer choice that the author must also believe if the argument is to hold. In other words, we are looking for an answer choice that if not true would destroy the argument. We are not looking to find an answer that makes the argument valid, only one that if it were not true would undermine the argument.

The argument proceeds by telling us that two illnesses, one mild and one severe, are both caused by oxygen shortages. The author then concludes that since the symptoms of both are similar, that the dangerous illness must be even more dangerous at high altitudes, which causes the mild illness. This conclusion is a bit tricky- the author is arguing that since the symptoms are similar, people with an edema at high altitudes might mistake it for mountain sickness, thus making such edemas more dangerous.

To find the right answer, we should negate our answer choices.

If we negate A, we end up with a statement that "The treatment for mountain sickness is the same as the treatment for edema"

This actually does undermine the argument. If an edema at high altitude is only more dangerous because the altitude would cause one to seek the wrong treatment- then determining that the treatments are the same would completely undermine the argument.

I would also recommend checking out some of the office hours for strengthen with necessary premise questions.

Lex on March 4, 2022

Thank you! I did that and it did help a lot :)