Dealing with abstract language in answer choices Forum

[New_Spice180]

Hey TLS,

While zeroing in on my weaknesses I've found that I have problems sometimes interpreting abstract answers, specifically Flaw questions. What did you all do to get more of a grip on what is going on in abstract Flaw answer choices?

[mcat4life87]

Do you have any examples of answer choices you didn't understand?

[Barack O'Drama]

Hey TLS,

While zeroing in on my weaknesses I've found that I have problems sometimes interpreting abstract answers, specifically Flaw questions. What did you all do to get more of a grip on what is going on in abstract Flaw answer choices?

I had a similar problem. The LSAT Trainer helped me a lot with this; with flaw Qs in general actually.

[Deardevil]

There is only a handful of correct flaws. Once you see enough questions, you will pick them apart more easily.

I'll list some out:

-Circular reasoning (this will bound to show up in an AC, and it's often never right; when it is, freebie!)
-Appeal to authority (extremely obvious; the author will try to use some "professional" to help establish his/her case)
-Parts (if the author is associating a whole to its individual features, or vice-versa, there is a composition/division error)
-Ad hominem (attacking the person making the argument instead of addessing the argument itself; terrible way to argue!)
-Term shift (probably the most subtle flaw that involves application of two definitions to one word, but it usually isn't correct, either)
-Misrepresentation (when the stimulus mentions surveys, this is probably correct, as the survey may not account for a feasible population)
-Percentage vs. numbers (when you see volume being compared with market share, there's a problem; 99% of a dollar =/= a measly $10 bill)

[maybeman]

The better you understand the specific flaw, the easier it is to understand it abstractly. I agree with deardevil that familiarity is the most helpful thing. Pick apart questions and you'll start to "feel" the AC more and more often. It's what the LSAT Trainer calls the elephant (your subconscious) doing the work as opposed to the rider (you).

[PhiladelphiaCollins]

Also, make sure you know the flaws inside and out. And by this I mean be able to actually explain (to yourself) what they are, rather than just pick up on it, because in the newer tests it seems like the ACs are worded funny so actually knowing the flaw, and the reasoning behind it will give you a huge boost.

[New_Spice180]

I was going through the trainer to freshen up on Flaw question strategies and I realized "hey I actually have a hard time interpreting these answer choices." I can't remember the exact drills but it highlighted that problem for me. I don't want to make my understanding too robotic/mechanical that I can't anticipate left field answers, however, it might do me some good to go over that list of flaws in the LR Bible.

The flaw that really gets me is the... "takes for granted that something that is sufficient for x's occurrence is necessary for its occurrence," or something to that degree. I believe I just need find more plain english ways of understanding some of these flaws, even though I understand most of them, when they occur in the context of a hefty stimulus the task can get kind of daunting, but alas I push on!