I have noticed that while taking PTs, in the rush of time, I end up committing the equivocation flaw on answer choices ALOT.
Do you all have any tips on avoiding this? Upon slow, untimed review, my mistakes stick out like a sore thumb and I feel stupid. But in the rush of time, these falsely equivocated answers just seem so attractive.
Here is an example by what I mean. I committed the following mistake:
The answer choice said “To offer evidence that the behavior of tadpoles is unexplainable” and I equivocated that with “To offer support that the inclusive kin theory cannot explain certain behaviors of tadpoles”.
These two ideas are very different, but in the rush of time, I falsely equivocated them. As stated before, I do this alot on RC.
Any help is much appreciated!
How to stop falling for the equivocation flaw in RC? Forum
- Louis1127
- Posts: 817
- Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 9:12 pm
- WaltGrace83
- Posts: 719
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 5:55 pm
Re: How to stop falling for the equivocation flaw in RC?
Sometimes (when I remember to), I will circle the two key words in the premise and the conclusion. For example....
37.4.15 (#185 in Cambridge NA)
Threat of harsh punishment → Decreases guilt or shame → Increases further commitment of transgressions
→
Increasing severity of legal penalties → may amplify people's tendency to ignore welfare of others
If I saw this question in real life, right away I would circle "ignore welfare of others" in the conclusion to tell myself that I should have something about ignoring the welfare of others. Because "commitment of transgressions is at the end of the chain," I would circle "increases" and "transgressions," telling myself that I should have something about "transgressions."
This circling visually cues me for when I re-check the answer. I have been trying to get out of the habit of eliminating 4, peering at the "right" answer and thinking "okay that looks good!," and moving on. Instead, I have been trying to double check my answer by fitting it between the P and C to see if it works. I think this helps my accuracy because I have caught myself a few times and it only takes 5 seconds to do this.
Just some thoughts - they might help and they might not.
EDIT: just realized you said "RC."
.....it's early.
37.4.15 (#185 in Cambridge NA)
Threat of harsh punishment → Decreases guilt or shame → Increases further commitment of transgressions
→
Increasing severity of legal penalties → may amplify people's tendency to ignore welfare of others
If I saw this question in real life, right away I would circle "ignore welfare of others" in the conclusion to tell myself that I should have something about ignoring the welfare of others. Because "commitment of transgressions is at the end of the chain," I would circle "increases" and "transgressions," telling myself that I should have something about "transgressions."
This circling visually cues me for when I re-check the answer. I have been trying to get out of the habit of eliminating 4, peering at the "right" answer and thinking "okay that looks good!," and moving on. Instead, I have been trying to double check my answer by fitting it between the P and C to see if it works. I think this helps my accuracy because I have caught myself a few times and it only takes 5 seconds to do this.
Just some thoughts - they might help and they might not.
EDIT: just realized you said "RC."
.....it's early.
- Louis1127
- Posts: 817
- Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 9:12 pm
Re: How to stop falling for the equivocation flaw in RC?
Haha, still very helpful, Walt!
As Papercut likes to say "RC and LR aren't that different"
As Papercut likes to say "RC and LR aren't that different"
