Arguments

Question 1

Three reasons for doing same Arg analysis procedure for EVERY arg question

Answer 1

1. It will automatically answer Conclusion, Assumption, and Flaw questions
2. You don’t have to think “what am I supposed to do here” for each indiv question
3. This process will underlie the answer to EVERY question type, with two exceptions:
   a. Inference questions
   b. Backwards Inference questions

Question 2

Arg analysis procedure (3 steps)

Answer 2

1. Identify Conclusion, separate it from evidence
2. Identify any/all Assumptions

3.a. Judge the validity of the argument
(judge the statistical probability that the conclusion is actually true, given the evidence, using ComSense)
(Valid-Invalid, Valid-Shaky-Ridiculous, Valid-Shaky-Very Shaky-Ridiculous, 0-100%)

3.b. Name any/all Flaws
(Recognize the Flaw category, or define the flaw in your own common sense terms)

Question 3

“Conclusion”

Answer 3

The main point of an Arg; the idea that the author is trying to convince the reader of

The one idea that follows, more or less logically, from all others in the Arg

80% of the time it’s an actual sentence (or part of one) in the Arg; 20% of the time it’s nowhere

The “so” line of the arg

Question 4

“Evidence”

Answer 4

Concrete support for the conclusion

The “since” lines of the Arg

Premises (major and minor)
Sub-conclusions

Also have:
Intro/Background noise
Examples, explanations
Incidental material
Opposed POVs

Question 5

Conclusion questions

Answer 5

Special brand of Inference question (because you’re asked to ID something that must be true)

“conclusion”
“main point”
“primary point”
“provides most support for which of the following”

But conclusion must be main/central truth

Question 6

Conclusion question trap answers

Answer 6

Wrong Part: restatements of pieces of evidence or sub-conclusions

General MisQuotes: precision mismatches

Too Strong

Illegal Linkage

Out of Bounds

Illegal Translation

Other’s POV, Opposite

Question 7

“Assumption”

Answer 7

Missing link between evidence and conclusion

Something the author must believe, or that must be true, in order for the conclusion to follow from the evidence

Unwritten, unstated, implicit, but necessary ‘since’ line
(“Stated isn’t assumed”, even if it has “assuming” in front)

“Minimum necessary connection”

• Arguments may have more than one assumption (thus a right answer to an Assumption question often won’t be SUFFICIENT to get the conclusion to follow from the evidence)
• Assumptions do not have to be “bad” or “invalid”

Question 8

Formula for identifying Arg assumptions

Answer 8

Word Change Formula: Any change in the exact wording between the ‘since’ and ‘so’ lines

Word changes can be additions, losses, or alterations of words or dictionary-definitions

Exception: Answers are allowed to mention things that are OOB, but only in negative/exclusionary terms

Question 9

Assumption question trap answers

Answer 9

Too Strong: answers that go further than absolutely necessary to bridge the gap between evidence and conclusion
(Ask yourself: “Is this the only way to get the conclusion to be true?”)

Question 10

14 Arg Flaw categories

Answer 10

1. (Generic) Bad Assumption
2. False Cause
   a. coincidence
   b. reversal
   c. extraneous cause
   d. multiple causation
3. Bad Generalization
   a. small sample size
   b. not representative, self-selecting
4. Illegal Translations
5. Appeals to Emotions/Conscience
6. Appeals to Authority/Public Opinion
7. Self-Contradiction
8. False Choice
9. Equivocation (Changed Def. of a Key Term)
10. Attacking the Speaker
11. Bad Analogy
12. Circular Reasoning
13. Part/Whole Confusion
14. Bad Math
    a. rates/ratios vs. absolute #’s
    b. overlapping sets/groups (venn diagram)
    c. stupid statistics, e.g. false probability translation
15. Failing to address Opposing POV

Question 11

“I will never attack a…”

Answer 11

“…‘since’ line”

Evidence lines are to be taken as unquestionable givens. Only assumptions, sub-conclusions, and conclusions are to be challenged/doubted/evaluated.

Question 12

Generic Bad Assumption

Answer 12

Catch-all Flaw category

Rely on dictionary-definitions and ComSense

Question 13

False Cause

Answer 13

ANY time an author makes a CAUSAL CLAIM in a conclusion or sub-conclusion, it’s shaky, because it constitutes the (bad) assumption that NONE of the following four things are happening:

1. Coincidence / Mere correlation
2. Confounding/Extraneous factor
3. Multiple Causation
4. Reversal (Y causes X)

Question 14

Illegal Translations

Answer 14

Confuses a “necessary” relationship for a “sufficient” one

Question 15

Appeals to Authority/Attacking the Speaker

Answer 15

Appeals to Authority/Attacking the Speaker being used as the PRIMARY evidence for a conclusion is a FLAW

Question 16

Bad Analogy

Answer 16

Two things aren’t similar enough to use comparison with their relationship as evidence for two other things’ similarity

(e.g. I got stronger when I lifted weights so I’ll get taller if I stretch)

Question 17

Circular reasoning

Answer 17

An Arg is circular when it’s evidence would be true only if it’s conclusion were taken to be true

LSAT language: Argument “assumes its own conclusion”

Question 18

“Strengthen”

Answer 18

“increase the probability that the conclusion is true, given the evidence”

Most common form: Something that tells you one of the assumptions in the Arg is true

Though Ari later says, “the answer could be something that gives you concrete evidence for the Conclusion, even with no connection whatsoever to the given evidence”

Finally, eliminate a possible alternative explanation for the Conclusion

Question 19

“Weaken”

Answer 19

“decrease the probability that the conclusion is true, given the evidence”

Most common form: Something that tells you one of the assumptions in the Arg is false

Though Ari later says, “the answer could be something that gives you concrete evidence against the Conclusion, even with no connection whatsoever to the given evidence”

Finally, make possible an alternative explanation for the Evidence