Which type is the toughest? Forum

[mehiguess]

What type of questions in the LR section do you typically find the most difficult and how do you go about attacking them? I have many resources and PT's I use for practice but i just wanted to hear from you guys. Maybe you use a method I have not explored. Personally, I have a tough time with "point at issue" and "assumption" questions. I know an assumption is merely an unstated premise but it does not make it any easier for me to see.

[flash21]

i think that a lot of people find assumption hard, along with paralell flaw probably being the hardest

[bp shinners]

i think that a lot of people find assumption hard, along with paralell flaw probably being the hardest

Parallel flaw is definitely one of the most time-consuming, but I haven't heard many students complain about their difficulty.

Necessary assumption questions however are different story. I would say they are the hardest questions.

[90convoy]

NA are the hardest for me. Sometimes SAs are too. Easiest for me are principle questions, gosh those are a joke sometimes

[mehiguess]

Any plans of attack on how to correctly answer the questions you all struggle with?

[062914123]

.

[magickware]

MSS questions irk me.

But assumption questions take the cake.

[RobertGolddust]

Sufficient assumptions are the hardest question type. necessary are a close contender when they force you to identify the "Gap." However, the common defender assumption is simple: Identify the conclusion, focus on scope, apply negation technique.

[bp shinners]

Sufficient assumptions are the hardest question type. necessary are a close contender when they force you to identify the "Gap." However, the common defender assumption is simple: Identify the conclusion, focus on scope, apply negation technique.

Quick trick for Sufficient Assumption questions - at least 50% of the time, the flaw in the argument is an equivocation. In other words, the conclusion introduces a new term. That new term has to show up in the answer choice, and you can usually eliminate 2 to 3 answers just based on that. Then, if the conclusion was conditional, that new term has to show up in the answer choice in the same condition as it did in the conclusion - so if it is sufficient in the conclusion, it must be sufficient in the answer choice (or negated in the necessary condition, because that would reflect the contrapositive); if it is necessary in the conclusion, it must be necessary in the answer choice (or negated in the sufficient condition, because that would reflect the contrapositive).