Page 1 of 1
Conditional reasoning in sufficient questions
Posted: Mon Feb 02, 2015 9:01 am
by ltowns1
When looking for condtionality in suff. questions am I looking for the something in the conclusion to trigger the premises sufficient statement? (Or the contrapositive of the stimulus)
Re: Conditional reasoning in sufficient questions
Posted: Mon Feb 02, 2015 12:21 pm
by LSAT Hacks (Graeme)
Your question isn't quite clear. But here's what you're looking for in SA questions. Most will follow a format like this:
Conclusion: A --> D
Evidence: A --> B, B --> C
Step 1: Draw conclusion
Step 2: Separate elements of conclusion: A _______ D
Step 3: Fill in evidence A --> B --> C ___ D
Step 4: Spot gap. Look for the answer that bridges the gap. In this case, C --> D or D --> C
I cannot emphasize enough how routine sufficient assumption questions should be.
Note: I used ______ because TLS doesn't show more than one space. Is there a way to make comments have more than one space between letters? It's relevant for some diagrams.
Re: Conditional reasoning in sufficient questions
Posted: Mon Feb 02, 2015 12:50 pm
by ltowns1
LSAT Hacks (Graeme) wrote:Your question isn't quite clear. But here's what you're looking for in SA questions. Most will follow a format like this:
Conclusion: A --> D
Evidence: A --> B, B --> C
Step 1: Draw conclusion
Step 2: Separate elements of conclusion: A _______ D
Step 3: Fill in evidence A --> B --> C ___ D
Step 4: Spot gap. Look for the answer that bridges the gap. In this case, C --> D or D --> C
I cannot emphasize enough how routine sufficient assumption questions should be.
Note: I used ______ because TLS doesn't show more than one space. Is there a way to make comments have more than one space between letters? It's relevant for some diagrams.
Not sure,I think I get what you're saying. Could you give a made up example of an actual argument???? It's weired but I always get confused with the ABC examples lol.
Re: Conditional reasoning in sufficient questions
Posted: Mon Feb 02, 2015 4:43 pm
by LSAT Hacks (Graeme)
All aarvarks are distraught.
Evidence: All ardvarks are bleak. Bleak things are confused about their role in life.
Right answer: If you're confused about your role in life, you're distraught.
Re: Conditional reasoning in sufficient questions
Posted: Mon Feb 02, 2015 6:16 pm
by ltowns1
LSAT Hacks (Graeme) wrote:All aarvarks are distraught.
Evidence: All ardvarks are bleak. Bleak things are confused about their role in life.
Right answer: If you're confused about your role in life, you're distraught.
Got it