Flaw in the reasoning questions

tmc07d
Posts: 61
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 5:51 pm

Flaw in the reasoning questions

Postby tmc07d » Mon Jan 31, 2011 1:29 pm

How do you answer flaw questions in LR. What is your approach to them.

bhan87
Posts: 850
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 8:08 pm

Re: Flaw in the reasoning questions

Postby bhan87 » Mon Jan 31, 2011 1:38 pm

A good start is getting a quick overview of the most common flaws. Understand how the stimulus will be worded with such a flaw, and how the answer choice will identify the flaw.

While you're going through flaw practice questions, you should WRITE OUT a sentence that explains the nature of the flaw and categorize it if possible. A few common ones pop up quite frequently (i.e. Correlation vs Causation, Percentages vs Numbers, etc.) Doing this over and over again will make most flaws routine. Because there is no shortage of flaw questions to practice with, you can probably answer all or nearly all flaw questions by simply drawing on precedent (i.e. the wording of this stimulus reminds of X flaw question).

I am a firm believer that flaw questions SHOULD receive a disproportionate amount of study because if you can master these questions it will greatly increase your ability in strengthen, weaken, sufficient, and necessary questions (which in total with the flaws accounts for over half the LR section). This is because every one of these questions begins with finding what's missing in the argument, essentially make it a flaw question.

SigBab
Posts: 13
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 1:45 pm

Re: Flaw in the reasoning questions

Postby SigBab » Mon Jan 31, 2011 1:45 pm

I agree with bhan.

Also, a method I used was to read the question stem (not the answers) before reading the stimulus. That way, I knew what I was looking for. After reading the stimulus, I would try to come up with the answer in my own words before reading the answers. Often, what I thought was worded in some way in one of the answers.

Surprisingly (as it's usually Analytical Reasoning), this section was where I was scoring poorly on practice tests. I was able to improve my total score by 6 points just by drilling these questions as much as I could.

bhan87
Posts: 850
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 8:08 pm

Re: Flaw in the reasoning questions

Postby bhan87 » Mon Jan 31, 2011 1:49 pm

SigBab wrote:I agree with bhan.

Also, a method I used was to read the question stem (not the answers) before reading the stimulus. That way, I knew what I was looking for. After reading the stimulus, I would try to come up with the answer in my own words before reading the answers. Often, what I thought was worded in some way in one of the answers.

Surprisingly (as it's usually Analytical Reasoning), this section was where I was scoring poorly on practice tests. I was able to improve my total score by 6 points just by drilling these questions as much as I could.


+1 to this advice!

wardy007
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2010 5:41 pm

Re: Flaw in the reasoning questions

Postby wardy007 » Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:01 pm

bhan87 wrote:A good start is getting a quick overview of the most common flaws. Understand how the stimulus will be worded with such a flaw, and how the answer choice will identify the flaw.

While you're going through flaw practice questions, you should WRITE OUT a sentence that explains the nature of the flaw and categorize it if possible. A few common ones pop up quite frequently (i.e. Correlation vs Causation, Percentages vs Numbers, etc.) Doing this over and over again will make most flaws routine. Because there is no shortage of flaw questions to practice with, you can probably answer all or nearly all flaw questions by simply drawing on precedent (i.e. the wording of this stimulus reminds of X flaw question).

I am a firm believer that flaw questions SHOULD receive a disproportionate amount of study because if you can master these questions it will greatly increase your ability in strengthen, weaken, sufficient, and necessary questions (which in total with the flaws accounts for over half the LR section). This is because every one of these questions begins with finding what's missing in the argument, essentially make it a flaw question.


this seems to be my hardest bump in studying and I am working to just do Flaw question after Flaw question...after Flaw question. it definitely goes hand in hand w/ assumption and strengthen/weaken questions. you need to get to the dang conclusion and find quickly and then find the issue with it.

i know this sounds weird but because i watch a lot of documentaries, i think of the rebuttals that the opposing side would have and it seems to help. are they skewing percentages are they using just a piece of evidence...




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Alexandros, Binghamton1018, cherrygalore, dj9i27, foodlaw, gwillygecko, Hikikomorist, LAW1995, nimbus cloud, Pozzo, SunDevil14 and 19 guests