What is an Argument ?
An argument is an attempt to provide a reason for believing something
by citing something else.No of claims are put forward in an
argument,the claim that is being supported is the conclusion.Claims
alleged to support the conclusion are the premises.
Words ,Phrases supporting Conclusions:
So;
This shows that;
Therefore;
We can infer that;
Hence;
Consequently;
It follows that;
This indicates that;
For that reason,we may say;
Words ,Phrases introducing Premises:
The reason is that;
Because;
Since;
Evidence;
On the basis of;
t follows from;
In view of;
We may infer from;
Gap between Premises and Conclusions is Assumptions—identify the gaps
and use it to find the solution.
Classification of Arguments
Deductive arguments are those in which the conclusion necessarily
follows from the premises/evidence. It shows tight connection between
the Premises and Conclusions. Most arguments on the test are
inductive, where the author presents the evidence as support for the
conclusion. The validity of the conclusion depends on the strength of
the evidence.
Unlike deductive arguments, the conclusion of an inductive argument is
always uncertain. You must be prepared to handle both reasonable
arguments (when the conclusion is likely) and false arguments (when
the conclusion is improbable). Each classification of inductive
reasoning carries its own associated fallacies.
Evaluation of an Argument—To find errors in Arguments
(1) If-Then Statements
Most arguments are based on some variation of an if-then statement,
which may be either directly stated or embedded. Understanding the
if-then premise reveals the underlying simplicity of arguments.
If the premise of an if-then statement is true, then the conclusion
must be true as well.
If A, then B
While three possible statements can be derived from the implication
"if A, then B", only one is valid.
The statement that IS logically equivalent to "if A, then B" is called
the contrapositive. It is stated as:
If not B, then not A
Let's explore why this is true.
"If there is a hurricane, then Samantha will cry"
There are four different hypothetical possibilities to consider when
making deductions based on this statement:
1) A hurricane occurs
2) A hurricane does not occur
3) Samantha cries
4) Samantha does not cry
Let's consider each individually:
1. If a hurricane occurs.
You know that if this is true, the result will be that Samantha will cry.
2. If a hurricane does not occur.
If a hurricane does not occur, you can deduce nothing about Samantha.
In particular, you cannot deduce that she does not cry. There are many
other reasons why Samantha could cry, besides a hurricane (fight with
her mom, she sees a sad movie, she gets sick).
3. If Samantha cries.
Again, you can't deduce anything about the occurence of a hurricane if
Samantha cries. The if-then statement doesn't assert that Samantha
cries only if a hurricane occurs, just that if it does, Samantha will
cry. Samantha can cry even on clear, sunny days.
4. If Samantha does not cry.
If Samantha does not cry, you can deduce that a hurricane did not
occur. Why? If it had occurred, then Samantha would definitely have
cried. Yet she didn't. So, we know that, given Samantha's disposition,
a hurricane did not occur.
To review, any time you see a statement in the form of "If A, then B",
contrapose the statement into "If not B, then not A".
You know only two things:
a) what will happen if X occurs
b) what will happen if Y does not occur.
Those are the only valid deductions that you can make based on that
original statement.
You can only assume two things about the implication "if A, then B":
1) If A is true, then B must be true.
2) If B is false, then A must be false.
2) Embedded If-Then Statements
If-then statements are frequently embedded in other structures, making
their detection more difficult.
Example: (Embedded If-then)
Jamie and Kyle cannot both go to the mall.
At first glance, this sentence does not appear to contain an if-then
statement. But it essentially says:
"if Jamie goes to the mall, then Kyle does not."
The contrapositive ("if Kyle goes to the mall, then Jamie does not")
correctly expresses the same thing.
Example: (Embedded If-then)
Heather will go to Europe only if she gets a raise at work.
Given this statement, we know that if Heather goes to Europe, she must
have gotten a raise at work.Students often wrongly interpret this
statement to mean:
"If Heather gets a raise at work, then she will go to Europe."
We have no guarantee of this. The only guarantee is that if Heather
doesn't get the raise, she will not go to Europe.
"A only if B" is logically equivalent to "if A, then B"
Fallacies from no.3 to no.15 are not important for Critical reasoning
Questions but a student should know about them
3) Circular Reasoning
Here an unsubstantiated assertion is used to justify another
unsubstantiated assertion,which is,or atleast could be ,used to
justify the first statement.For instance,
Full scholarships are appropriate for disadantaged scholars because it
is right to offer a top-notch education to those most capable.
This argument is circular because "right" means essentially the same
thing as "appropriate." In effect, the author writer is saying that
scholarships are appropriate because they are appropriate.
(4) The Biased Sample Fallacy
This is commited whenever the data for a statistical inference is
drawn from a sample that is not representative of the population under
consideration.
For example:
In a recent survey conducted by The Times of India of its readers,60%
of the respondents indicated strong support to Lalu Prasad Yadav.Hence
the survey clearly shows that Lalu yadav is the most popular leader
among the masses.
The data for the inference in this argument is drawn from a sample
that is not reprentative of the entire electorate.
6) The Insufficient Sample Fallacy
The Fallacy of the Insufficient Sample is committed whenever an
inadequate sample is used to justify the conclusion drawn.
Here's an argument that commits the fallacy of the insufficient sample:
I have worked with three people from Bangalore City and found them to
be obnoxious, pushy and rude. It is obvious that people from Bangalore
City have a bad attitude.
The data for the inference in this argument is insufficient to support
the conclusion. Three observations of people are not sufficient to
support a conclusion for whole city population..
(4) Ad hominem
One of the most often employed fallacies, ad hominen means "to the
man" and indicates an attack that is made upon a person rather than
upon the statements that person has made.
An example is "Don't listen to my opponent; he's handicapped."
(7) The Fallacy of Faulty Analogy
Reasoning by analogy functions by comparing two similar things.
Because they are alike in various ways, the fallacy is that it is
likely they will share another trait as well. Faulty Analogy arguments
draw similarities between the things compared that are not relevant to
the characteristic being inferred in the conclusion.
Here's an example of a Faulty Analogy fallacy:
Ram and Shyam excel at both football and basketball. Since Ram is also
a singer, it is likely that Shyam also excels at singing.
In this example, numerous similarities between Ram and Shyam are taken
as the basis for the inference that they share additional traits.
(8) Straw Man
Here the speaker attributes an argument to an opponent that does not
represent the opponent's true position.
For instance, a political candidate might charge that his opponent
"wants to let all prisoners go free," when in fact his opponent simply
favors a highly limited furlough system. The person is portrayed as
someone that he is not.
(9) The "After This, Therefore, Because of This" Fallacy (Post hoc
ergo propter hoc)
This is a "false cause" fallacy in which something is associated with
something else because of mere proximity of time. One often encounters
people assuming that because one thing happened after another, the
first caused it, as with "I stood up; Sachin got out. My standing up
resulted in a loss of wicket." The error in arguments that commit this
fallacy is that their conclusions are causal claims that are not
sufficiently substantiated by the evidence.
Here are two examples of the After This, Therefore Because of This Fallacy:
Ten minutes after walking into the auditorium, I began to feel sick to
my stomach. There must have been something in the air in that building
that caused my nausea.
In the first example, a causal connection is posited between two
events simply on the basis of one occurring before the other. Without
further evidence to support it, the causal claim based on the
correlation is premature.
(10) The Either or Thinking
This is the so-called black or white fallacy. Essentially, it says
"Either you believe what I'm saying, or you must believe exactly the
opposite."
Here is an example of the black or white fallacy:
Since you don't believe that the earth is teetering on the edge of
destruction, you must believe that pollution and other adverse effects
that man has on the environment are of no concern whatsoever.
The argument above assumes that there are only two possible
alternatives open to us. There is no room for a middle ground.
(11) The "All Things are Equal" Fallacy
This fallacy is committed when it is assumed, without justification,
that background conditions have remained the same at different
times/locations. In most instances, this is an unwarranted assumption
for the simple reason that things rarely remain the same over extended
periods of time, and things rarely remain the same from place to
place.
The last time winner of south delhi constituency won the general
election. This year, the winner of the south delhi constituency will
win the general election.
The assumption operative in this argument is that nothing has changed
since the last primary. No evidence or justification is offered for
this assumption.
(12) The Fallacy of Equivocation
The Fallacy of Equivocation occurs when a word or phrase that has more
than one meaning is employed in different meanings throughout the
argument.
"Every society is, of course, repressive to some extent - as Sigmund
Freud pointed out, repression is the price we pay for civilization."
In this example, the word repression is used in two completely
different contexts. "Repression" in Freud's mind meant restricting
sexual and psychological desires. "Repression" in the second context
does not mean repression of individual desires, but government
restriction of individual liberties, such as that in a totalitarian
state.
(13) Non Sequitor
This means "does not follow," which is short for the conclusion does
not follow from the premise. To say, "The house is white; therefore,
it must be big" is an example of the Non Sequitor fallacy. It may be a
big house, but there is no intrinsic connection with its being white.
(14) Argument ad populum
A group of children are playing, trying to determine no of balls in an
opaque box. "I wonder if there are less than 4 or more than 4 balls in
the box," says one student. "I know how we can tell!" pipes up
another. "All right, how?" asks the teacher, resigned to the worst.
Beams the child: "We can vote."
This is argumentum ad populum, the belief that truth can be determined
by more or less putting it to a vote. Democracy is a very nice thing,
but it doesn't determine truth. Polls are good for telling you what
people think, not whether those thoughts are correct.
(15) Contradiction
Contradiction occurs when a writer asserts two opposing statements
simultaneously. For example, saying "it is wet and it is dry" is a
contradiction. Typical arguments on the test obscure the contradiction
to the point that the argument can be quite compelling. Here's a great
example:
We cannot know anyone, because we intuitively realize that people are
unreliable.
At first glance this argument sounds reasonable, but "intuitively
realize" means "to know." Thus the author is actually saying that we
know that we don't know anyone. This is classic contradiction.
Typical Questions
Despite the wide variety of arguments used on the test, there are
essentially only eight types of questions that are asked.
1) Assumption Questions
When a question asks you to find an author's assumption, it's asking
you to find the statement without which the argument falls apart.Make
use of denial technique. Simply negate the statement and see if the
argument falls apart. If it does, that choice is the correct
assumption. If, on the other hand, the argument is unaffected, the
choice is wrong.
Below are stated some of the ways in which assumption questions are worded:
Which one of the following is assumed by the author?
Upon which one of the following assumptions does the author rely?
The argument depends on the assumption that. ..
Which one of the following, if added to the passage, will make the
conclusion logical?
The validity of the argument depends on which one of the following?
The argument presupposes which one of the following?
2) Strengthen and Weaken Questions
An argument can be weakened by destroying a central piece of evidence
or by attacking the validity of the author's assumptions. In contrast,
an argument can be strengthened by providing additional support, by
affirming the truth of an assumption or by presenting additional
persuasive evidence.
Here are some of the ways in which strengthen/weaken the argument
questions are worded:
Which one of the following, if true, would most weaken the argument?
Which one of the following, if true, would most strengthen the argument?
Which one of the following, if true, would most seriously damage the
argument above?
Which one of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the argument above?
Which one of the following, if true, is the most serious criticism of
the argument above?
Which one of the following, if true, would provide the most support
for the conclusion in the argument above?
The argument above would be more persuasive if which one of the
following were found to be true?
3) Inference Questions
Inference questions require you to consider the statements as evidence
and then draw a conclusion from them. A valid inference is something
that must be true if the statements in the passage are true. It is an
extension of the argument rather than a necessary part of it.
Inference questions probably have the most varied wording of all the
Logical Reasoning question stems. Some are obvious, others are subtle,
and still others may resemble other question types.
Below is the quick rundown of the various forms that inference
questions are likely to take on your test:
Which one of the following can be inferred from the argument above?
The author suggests that. ..
If all the statements above are true, which one of the following must
also be true?
The author of the passage would most likely agree with which one of
the following?
The passage provides the most support for which one of the
following?Which one of the following is probably the conclusion toward
which the author is moving?
4) Flaw Questions
This question asks you to recognize what's wrong with an argument.
Most critique the reasoning by pointing out a fallacy. Other flaw
questions are more specific and attack the argument's reasoning.
Here are typical flaw questions:
Which one of the following contains a flaw that most closely parallels
the flaw contained in the passage?
The speakers will not be able to settle their argument unless they
The conclusion above is unsound because
Which one of the following best identifies the flaw in the above argument?
In presenting her position the author does which one of the following?
5) Method of Argument Questions
Method-of-argument questions ask you to pick the choice that describes
how the authorpresents her case. To tackle these, you must be able to
analyze the structure of an argument. If you can't identify the
evidence and conclusion, you'll have difficulty describing how an
argument works.
Most questions involve classic argumentative structures, such as
"arguing from a small sample to a larger group," or "inferring a
causal relationship from a correlation." The other type of
method-of-argument question gives a description of the argument in
much more specific terms. Anexample of this might read, "The author
presents his case in order to show that......"
6) Similar-Reasoning Questions
Similar-reasoning questions require you to identify the answer that
contains the reasoning most similar to that in the stimulus. The key
is to summarize the argument's overall form and match it to that of
the correct choice. A good approach to these questions is to see if
the argument can be symbolized algebraically, using Xs and Ys.
Example: All fish swim. This creature swims. Therefore, it must be a fish.
This (flawed) argument can be symbolized in the following way:
All X do Y. This does Y. Therefore, this must be an X.
If the stimulus can be symbolized this way, your job will be to search
for the choice that can be symbolized in the same way. Your answer
might look something like this:
Every mother (all X) loves singing (does Y). Jenny is singing (this
does Y). So she must be a mother. (therefore, this must be an X).
7) Paradox Questions
When an argument contains two or more seemingly inconsistent
statements, it presents a paradox. Most paradoxical arguments end with
a contradiction. Another type of paradox has the argument build to a
certain point, then change to the exact opposite of what you expect.
In a typical paradox question, you'll be asked either to find the
choice that "explains the paradoxical result", "explains the
inconsistent findings", or "resolves the apparent discrepancy." This
will be the choice that reconciles the seemingly inconsistent
statements in the argument while allowing them all to still be true.
8) Principle Questions
Principle questions ask you to apply a specific situation into a
global generality (or vice versa). You may be given an argument and
asked to find the principle that justifies the author's reasoning.
Possible question stems:
The author's position most closely conforms to which one of the
following principles?
What principle best accounts for or justifies the author's position?
Which one of the following principles would justify Al's refusal to
follow the author's recommendation
The correct answer to principle questions expresses the key concepts
and contains the key terms that the other choices omit. Avoid choices
that are beyond the scope of the argument. Most of the wrong choices
contain principles that sound formal and look reasonable, but they
don't address the author's main concern.
An argument is an attempt to provide a reason for believing something
by citing something else.No of claims are put forward in an
argument,the claim that is being supported is the conclusion.Claims
alleged to support the conclusion are the premises.
Words ,Phrases supporting Conclusions:
So;
This shows that;
Therefore;
We can infer that;
Hence;
Consequently;
It follows that;
This indicates that;
For that reason,we may say;
Words ,Phrases introducing Premises:
The reason is that;
Because;
Since;
Evidence;
On the basis of;
t follows from;
In view of;
We may infer from;
Gap between Premises and Conclusions is Assumptions—identify the gaps
and use it to find the solution.
Classification of Arguments
Deductive arguments are those in which the conclusion necessarily
follows from the premises/evidence. It shows tight connection between
the Premises and Conclusions. Most arguments on the test are
inductive, where the author presents the evidence as support for the
conclusion. The validity of the conclusion depends on the strength of
the evidence.
Unlike deductive arguments, the conclusion of an inductive argument is
always uncertain. You must be prepared to handle both reasonable
arguments (when the conclusion is likely) and false arguments (when
the conclusion is improbable). Each classification of inductive
reasoning carries its own associated fallacies.
Evaluation of an Argument—To find errors in Arguments
(1) If-Then Statements
Most arguments are based on some variation of an if-then statement,
which may be either directly stated or embedded. Understanding the
if-then premise reveals the underlying simplicity of arguments.
If the premise of an if-then statement is true, then the conclusion
must be true as well.
If A, then B
While three possible statements can be derived from the implication
"if A, then B", only one is valid.
The statement that IS logically equivalent to "if A, then B" is called
the contrapositive. It is stated as:
If not B, then not A
Let's explore why this is true.
"If there is a hurricane, then Samantha will cry"
There are four different hypothetical possibilities to consider when
making deductions based on this statement:
1) A hurricane occurs
2) A hurricane does not occur
3) Samantha cries
4) Samantha does not cry
Let's consider each individually:
1. If a hurricane occurs.
You know that if this is true, the result will be that Samantha will cry.
2. If a hurricane does not occur.
If a hurricane does not occur, you can deduce nothing about Samantha.
In particular, you cannot deduce that she does not cry. There are many
other reasons why Samantha could cry, besides a hurricane (fight with
her mom, she sees a sad movie, she gets sick).
3. If Samantha cries.
Again, you can't deduce anything about the occurence of a hurricane if
Samantha cries. The if-then statement doesn't assert that Samantha
cries only if a hurricane occurs, just that if it does, Samantha will
cry. Samantha can cry even on clear, sunny days.
4. If Samantha does not cry.
If Samantha does not cry, you can deduce that a hurricane did not
occur. Why? If it had occurred, then Samantha would definitely have
cried. Yet she didn't. So, we know that, given Samantha's disposition,
a hurricane did not occur.
To review, any time you see a statement in the form of "If A, then B",
contrapose the statement into "If not B, then not A".
You know only two things:
a) what will happen if X occurs
b) what will happen if Y does not occur.
Those are the only valid deductions that you can make based on that
original statement.
You can only assume two things about the implication "if A, then B":
1) If A is true, then B must be true.
2) If B is false, then A must be false.
2) Embedded If-Then Statements
If-then statements are frequently embedded in other structures, making
their detection more difficult.
Example: (Embedded If-then)
Jamie and Kyle cannot both go to the mall.
At first glance, this sentence does not appear to contain an if-then
statement. But it essentially says:
"if Jamie goes to the mall, then Kyle does not."
The contrapositive ("if Kyle goes to the mall, then Jamie does not")
correctly expresses the same thing.
Example: (Embedded If-then)
Heather will go to Europe only if she gets a raise at work.
Given this statement, we know that if Heather goes to Europe, she must
have gotten a raise at work.Students often wrongly interpret this
statement to mean:
"If Heather gets a raise at work, then she will go to Europe."
We have no guarantee of this. The only guarantee is that if Heather
doesn't get the raise, she will not go to Europe.
"A only if B" is logically equivalent to "if A, then B"
Fallacies from no.3 to no.15 are not important for Critical reasoning
Questions but a student should know about them
3) Circular Reasoning
Here an unsubstantiated assertion is used to justify another
unsubstantiated assertion,which is,or atleast could be ,used to
justify the first statement.For instance,
Full scholarships are appropriate for disadantaged scholars because it
is right to offer a top-notch education to those most capable.
This argument is circular because "right" means essentially the same
thing as "appropriate." In effect, the author writer is saying that
scholarships are appropriate because they are appropriate.
(4) The Biased Sample Fallacy
This is commited whenever the data for a statistical inference is
drawn from a sample that is not representative of the population under
consideration.
For example:
In a recent survey conducted by The Times of India of its readers,60%
of the respondents indicated strong support to Lalu Prasad Yadav.Hence
the survey clearly shows that Lalu yadav is the most popular leader
among the masses.
The data for the inference in this argument is drawn from a sample
that is not reprentative of the entire electorate.
6) The Insufficient Sample Fallacy
The Fallacy of the Insufficient Sample is committed whenever an
inadequate sample is used to justify the conclusion drawn.
Here's an argument that commits the fallacy of the insufficient sample:
I have worked with three people from Bangalore City and found them to
be obnoxious, pushy and rude. It is obvious that people from Bangalore
City have a bad attitude.
The data for the inference in this argument is insufficient to support
the conclusion. Three observations of people are not sufficient to
support a conclusion for whole city population..
(4) Ad hominem
One of the most often employed fallacies, ad hominen means "to the
man" and indicates an attack that is made upon a person rather than
upon the statements that person has made.
An example is "Don't listen to my opponent; he's handicapped."
(7) The Fallacy of Faulty Analogy
Reasoning by analogy functions by comparing two similar things.
Because they are alike in various ways, the fallacy is that it is
likely they will share another trait as well. Faulty Analogy arguments
draw similarities between the things compared that are not relevant to
the characteristic being inferred in the conclusion.
Here's an example of a Faulty Analogy fallacy:
Ram and Shyam excel at both football and basketball. Since Ram is also
a singer, it is likely that Shyam also excels at singing.
In this example, numerous similarities between Ram and Shyam are taken
as the basis for the inference that they share additional traits.
(8) Straw Man
Here the speaker attributes an argument to an opponent that does not
represent the opponent's true position.
For instance, a political candidate might charge that his opponent
"wants to let all prisoners go free," when in fact his opponent simply
favors a highly limited furlough system. The person is portrayed as
someone that he is not.
(9) The "After This, Therefore, Because of This" Fallacy (Post hoc
ergo propter hoc)
This is a "false cause" fallacy in which something is associated with
something else because of mere proximity of time. One often encounters
people assuming that because one thing happened after another, the
first caused it, as with "I stood up; Sachin got out. My standing up
resulted in a loss of wicket." The error in arguments that commit this
fallacy is that their conclusions are causal claims that are not
sufficiently substantiated by the evidence.
Here are two examples of the After This, Therefore Because of This Fallacy:
Ten minutes after walking into the auditorium, I began to feel sick to
my stomach. There must have been something in the air in that building
that caused my nausea.
In the first example, a causal connection is posited between two
events simply on the basis of one occurring before the other. Without
further evidence to support it, the causal claim based on the
correlation is premature.
(10) The Either or Thinking
This is the so-called black or white fallacy. Essentially, it says
"Either you believe what I'm saying, or you must believe exactly the
opposite."
Here is an example of the black or white fallacy:
Since you don't believe that the earth is teetering on the edge of
destruction, you must believe that pollution and other adverse effects
that man has on the environment are of no concern whatsoever.
The argument above assumes that there are only two possible
alternatives open to us. There is no room for a middle ground.
(11) The "All Things are Equal" Fallacy
This fallacy is committed when it is assumed, without justification,
that background conditions have remained the same at different
times/locations. In most instances, this is an unwarranted assumption
for the simple reason that things rarely remain the same over extended
periods of time, and things rarely remain the same from place to
place.
The last time winner of south delhi constituency won the general
election. This year, the winner of the south delhi constituency will
win the general election.
The assumption operative in this argument is that nothing has changed
since the last primary. No evidence or justification is offered for
this assumption.
(12) The Fallacy of Equivocation
The Fallacy of Equivocation occurs when a word or phrase that has more
than one meaning is employed in different meanings throughout the
argument.
"Every society is, of course, repressive to some extent - as Sigmund
Freud pointed out, repression is the price we pay for civilization."
In this example, the word repression is used in two completely
different contexts. "Repression" in Freud's mind meant restricting
sexual and psychological desires. "Repression" in the second context
does not mean repression of individual desires, but government
restriction of individual liberties, such as that in a totalitarian
state.
(13) Non Sequitor
This means "does not follow," which is short for the conclusion does
not follow from the premise. To say, "The house is white; therefore,
it must be big" is an example of the Non Sequitor fallacy. It may be a
big house, but there is no intrinsic connection with its being white.
(14) Argument ad populum
A group of children are playing, trying to determine no of balls in an
opaque box. "I wonder if there are less than 4 or more than 4 balls in
the box," says one student. "I know how we can tell!" pipes up
another. "All right, how?" asks the teacher, resigned to the worst.
Beams the child: "We can vote."
This is argumentum ad populum, the belief that truth can be determined
by more or less putting it to a vote. Democracy is a very nice thing,
but it doesn't determine truth. Polls are good for telling you what
people think, not whether those thoughts are correct.
(15) Contradiction
Contradiction occurs when a writer asserts two opposing statements
simultaneously. For example, saying "it is wet and it is dry" is a
contradiction. Typical arguments on the test obscure the contradiction
to the point that the argument can be quite compelling. Here's a great
example:
We cannot know anyone, because we intuitively realize that people are
unreliable.
At first glance this argument sounds reasonable, but "intuitively
realize" means "to know." Thus the author is actually saying that we
know that we don't know anyone. This is classic contradiction.
Typical Questions
Despite the wide variety of arguments used on the test, there are
essentially only eight types of questions that are asked.
1) Assumption Questions
When a question asks you to find an author's assumption, it's asking
you to find the statement without which the argument falls apart.Make
use of denial technique. Simply negate the statement and see if the
argument falls apart. If it does, that choice is the correct
assumption. If, on the other hand, the argument is unaffected, the
choice is wrong.
Below are stated some of the ways in which assumption questions are worded:
Which one of the following is assumed by the author?
Upon which one of the following assumptions does the author rely?
The argument depends on the assumption that. ..
Which one of the following, if added to the passage, will make the
conclusion logical?
The validity of the argument depends on which one of the following?
The argument presupposes which one of the following?
2) Strengthen and Weaken Questions
An argument can be weakened by destroying a central piece of evidence
or by attacking the validity of the author's assumptions. In contrast,
an argument can be strengthened by providing additional support, by
affirming the truth of an assumption or by presenting additional
persuasive evidence.
Here are some of the ways in which strengthen/weaken the argument
questions are worded:
Which one of the following, if true, would most weaken the argument?
Which one of the following, if true, would most strengthen the argument?
Which one of the following, if true, would most seriously damage the
argument above?
Which one of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the argument above?
Which one of the following, if true, is the most serious criticism of
the argument above?
Which one of the following, if true, would provide the most support
for the conclusion in the argument above?
The argument above would be more persuasive if which one of the
following were found to be true?
3) Inference Questions
Inference questions require you to consider the statements as evidence
and then draw a conclusion from them. A valid inference is something
that must be true if the statements in the passage are true. It is an
extension of the argument rather than a necessary part of it.
Inference questions probably have the most varied wording of all the
Logical Reasoning question stems. Some are obvious, others are subtle,
and still others may resemble other question types.
Below is the quick rundown of the various forms that inference
questions are likely to take on your test:
Which one of the following can be inferred from the argument above?
The author suggests that. ..
If all the statements above are true, which one of the following must
also be true?
The author of the passage would most likely agree with which one of
the following?
The passage provides the most support for which one of the
following?Which one of the following is probably the conclusion toward
which the author is moving?
4) Flaw Questions
This question asks you to recognize what's wrong with an argument.
Most critique the reasoning by pointing out a fallacy. Other flaw
questions are more specific and attack the argument's reasoning.
Here are typical flaw questions:
Which one of the following contains a flaw that most closely parallels
the flaw contained in the passage?
The speakers will not be able to settle their argument unless they
The conclusion above is unsound because
Which one of the following best identifies the flaw in the above argument?
In presenting her position the author does which one of the following?
5) Method of Argument Questions
Method-of-argument questions ask you to pick the choice that describes
how the authorpresents her case. To tackle these, you must be able to
analyze the structure of an argument. If you can't identify the
evidence and conclusion, you'll have difficulty describing how an
argument works.
Most questions involve classic argumentative structures, such as
"arguing from a small sample to a larger group," or "inferring a
causal relationship from a correlation." The other type of
method-of-argument question gives a description of the argument in
much more specific terms. Anexample of this might read, "The author
presents his case in order to show that......"
6) Similar-Reasoning Questions
Similar-reasoning questions require you to identify the answer that
contains the reasoning most similar to that in the stimulus. The key
is to summarize the argument's overall form and match it to that of
the correct choice. A good approach to these questions is to see if
the argument can be symbolized algebraically, using Xs and Ys.
Example: All fish swim. This creature swims. Therefore, it must be a fish.
This (flawed) argument can be symbolized in the following way:
All X do Y. This does Y. Therefore, this must be an X.
If the stimulus can be symbolized this way, your job will be to search
for the choice that can be symbolized in the same way. Your answer
might look something like this:
Every mother (all X) loves singing (does Y). Jenny is singing (this
does Y). So she must be a mother. (therefore, this must be an X).
7) Paradox Questions
When an argument contains two or more seemingly inconsistent
statements, it presents a paradox. Most paradoxical arguments end with
a contradiction. Another type of paradox has the argument build to a
certain point, then change to the exact opposite of what you expect.
In a typical paradox question, you'll be asked either to find the
choice that "explains the paradoxical result", "explains the
inconsistent findings", or "resolves the apparent discrepancy." This
will be the choice that reconciles the seemingly inconsistent
statements in the argument while allowing them all to still be true.
8) Principle Questions
Principle questions ask you to apply a specific situation into a
global generality (or vice versa). You may be given an argument and
asked to find the principle that justifies the author's reasoning.
Possible question stems:
The author's position most closely conforms to which one of the
following principles?
What principle best accounts for or justifies the author's position?
Which one of the following principles would justify Al's refusal to
follow the author's recommendation
The correct answer to principle questions expresses the key concepts
and contains the key terms that the other choices omit. Avoid choices
that are beyond the scope of the argument. Most of the wrong choices
contain principles that sound formal and look reasonable, but they
don't address the author's main concern.
ReplyDeleteBest bank coaching centres in bangalore
.www.miqclasses.com