Quick question on logic..(gap)

anticule
Posts: 43
Joined: Sat May 05, 2012 3:43 am

Quick question on logic..(gap)

Postby anticule » Sun Jul 01, 2012 10:19 pm

----
Last edited by anticule on Wed Aug 28, 2013 11:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

josemnz83
Posts: 62
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 4:19 pm

Re: Quick question on logic..(gap)

Postby josemnz83 » Mon Jul 02, 2012 9:08 am

The first thing I do is find the conclusion of the argument and see if it is supported by the evidence. If not, then look for the gap between evidence and conclusion. A quick strategy I have learned is to then negate the answer choices and see if the conclusion still holds. If negating the assumption no longer makes the conclusion true, then you probably have found your gap.

I hope this helps you. I'm still learning this myself.

Oscar85
Posts: 71
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2012 2:53 pm

Re: Quick question on logic..(gap)

Postby Oscar85 » Mon Jul 02, 2012 11:40 am

When it comes to justify the conclusion questions, I first read the stimulus and see if I can deduce it on my own. If not, then I use the mechanistic approach of PWS, where they instruct you to identify language that is present in the conclusion but not in the premises, or new language that is in the premises but not the conclusion.

Necessary assumption questions I look at the conclusion and the answer choice (usually you can see the gap on your own, just keep practicing) and try to find the AC that best fits (prephrasing works great here)... If there is more than one, that's when I employ the negation technique (negating the AC will weaken the argument, thereby making that answer choice necessary for the argument to work). Hope this helps... This is what I do, and I have seen marked improvement on the assumption questions.

User avatar
TopHatToad
Posts: 85
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 1:09 pm

Re: Quick question on logic..(gap)

Postby TopHatToad » Mon Jul 02, 2012 12:01 pm

Oscar85 wrote:When it comes to justify the conclusion questions, I first read the stimulus and see if I can deduce it on my own. If not, then I use the mechanistic approach of PWS, where they instruct you to identify language that is present in the conclusion but not in the premises, or new language that is in the premises but not the conclusion.

Necessary assumption questions I look at the conclusion and the answer choice (usually you can see the gap on your own, just keep practicing) and try to find the AC that best fits (prephrasing works great here)... If there is more than one, that's when I employ the negation technique (negating the AC will weaken the argument, thereby making that answer choice necessary for the argument to work). Hope this helps... This is what I do, and I have seen marked improvement on the assumption questions.


+1
Keep in mind that the negation test works only for necessary assumptions. Beyond that, if you're not seeing the assumptions before you get to the answers, keep drilling! The same themes and patterns come up incredibly often.

User avatar
flippacious
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri May 11, 2012 3:54 pm

Re: Quick question on logic..(gap)

Postby flippacious » Mon Jul 02, 2012 12:09 pm

OP, have you tried really forcing yourself to prephrase/predict the answer?

I would take a bunch of assumption questions, both sufficient (“justify the conclusion” in LR bible) and necessary (“assumption” in LR bible). Sit down with them and go through them very slowly. Cover the answer choices and start with the stimulus. Bracket the conclusion. Make sure you understand the conclusion, the premises, and how they relate to each other. Look at the conclusion and ask yourself “how is the author supporting this statement?” Then, decide what’s missing in the evidence in order to get to that conclusion. After some repetition, you’ll start to see some patterns in the argument formats and it’ll get easier.

Also, make sure you identify the question type and whether the assumption you are looking for is sufficient or necessary to the argument’s validity. Then, prephrase. Force yourself to write down what you expect the answer to be BEFORE reading any answer choices. Your prediction can be vague (something like “nothing else causes X to happen”) or more specific, depending on the argument. But really focus on making yourself figure it out and write it down, then compare your guess to the answer choices. This might be really slow and frustrating, but I think it helps. I did a variation of this for every LR question type and I believe it’s a good way to train your brain. Coming up with a prediction on your own teaches you what to look for much more than deciphering the answer choices. You want to be able to come up with the assumption, or at least some notion of it, on your own instead of relying on the answer choices to give you a hint about what you’re looking for.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 6 guests