Bunuel
Recently, many medical students have been enrolling in joint M.D./J.D. programs, in which they receive both medical and law degrees at the conclusion of their studies. But since medical students primarily earn their law degree in order to protect themselves from malpractice lawsuits as doctors, we must still conclude that they are primarily doctors, and not lawyers.
Which of the following is an assumption that supports drawing the conclusion above from the reason given?
A. Some students who complete such joint programs choose to become lawyers in fields in which they do not use their medical training, while those who choose to become doctors do use legal training.
B. Certain recipients of these joint degrees are not any less diligent than others in the legal courses that they take, with notable exceptions.
C. If such joint degrees required that students focus more on their legal studies than their medical studies, students could be considered lawyers after graduation.
D. A person cannot be considered a lawyer if he or she received a law degree for purposes other than practicing the law.
E. Medical students, in doing extensive lab work, get much more practical experience about their future field than law students get about practicing law.
OFFICIAL EXPLANATION
Our conclusion here is helpfully signaled by the word “conclude”: these graduates are doctors, not lawyers. Why? Because the students view their medical studies as primary and their legal studies as secondary. To link one idea to the other, we have to make the assumption that people who study the law, but do not intend to practice it, are not lawyers--the assumption presented in (D).
The fact that certain students might be exceptions to the rule of prioritizing medical studies (A) doesn’t help us, and is not necessary to make the leap between how students view their legal studies and their subsequent professional titles. The added information that the doctors use legal training, but the lawyers do not use medical training, is unnecessary details that doesn’t help us identify the assumption.
The argument is made on the basis of what students primarily do after graduation. Because of this, their performance in their legal courses is actually irrelevant to this argument (B). They could be awesome, they could be awful--all that matters in this passage is what they do afterward.
Similarly, (C) focuses on the courses that students take, and not on the careers that they choose to pursue after obtaining their degrees. It can’t be our assumption, as this statement concerns what happens before, not after, graduation.
Finally, (E) also prioritizes the pre-graduation phase of the degrees, with a suggestion about gaining experience in the field. While this might be helpful for the individual students, it’s not of any help in identifying the assumption here about whom can be called lawyers, and so it is not the correct answer.