3 posts • Page 1 of 1
- Posts: 299
- Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 1:05 am
I always stop and waste a lot of time thinking and wrongfully trying to match the sufficient and necessary flaw answer to the argument in the stimulus often when there isnt one. Anyone has any idea how to avoid this? Should I only think about this flaw when there is a clear conditional statement or causal reasoning in the argument?
- Posts: 5790
- Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2011 2:58 am
Here's some pure gold that should help you out:
- Posts: 3091
- Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:05 pm
Fianna13 wrote:Should I only think about this flaw when there is a clear conditional statement or causal reasoning in the argument?
Always find the flaw in the argument. Then, find the answer choices that have to do with that flaw. Then, compare those answer choices to figure out which one is sufficient or necessary, depending on the question.
Honestly, I'm a little confused by what you're doing from your post. Can you clarify a bit?