Two questions on improving LR section Forum

[gambelda]

1) Can I take Assumption questions to instead say "which statement must be true in order for this conclusion to be correct?"

I've tried the negate and attack method for necessary conditions and mechanistic approach for sufficient conditions. Neither seem to benefit me. Is turning an assumption question into this MBT question a valid approach? It seems like I might be able to do better by doing this because most assumption questions appear to have flaws - and if I can fill those flaws with the assumption by determining which AC makes the conclusion of the argument correct, then this would be the correct AC. Am I correct in this logic?

2) Is there a problem with making your own arguments and then forming questions around them?

I drive or fly to my clients and have a lot of 'down-time' when doing so. I started thinking about things and forming my own arguments in my head while I was driving and then asking myself "what assumption did I make", "what fact would weaken my argument", "what facts, if I knew them, would help my argument"

Is this okay to do or do I risk missing key things that only reading actual LSAT questions provides?

[bee's vision]

1) an answer choice can be true and still wrong, it still has to be an unstated premise. A lot of wrong answers for assumption questions just rehash info from the stimulus.

2) that can only help you