Chapter 7: Weaken questions

Question 1

Weaken Questions

Answer 1

-Require you to select the answer choice that undermines the author’s argument as decisively as possible
-Part of the Third family

Question 2

1st rule to keep in mind when approaching these questions:

Answer 2

1. The stimulus will contain an argument. Because you are asked to weaken the author’s reasoning, and reasoning requires a conclusion, an argument will always be present

Question 3

2nd rule to keep in mind when approaching these questions:

Answer 3

2. Focus on the conclusion. Almost all correct weaken answer choices impact the conclusion.

Question 4

3rd rule to keep in mind when approaching these questions:

Answer 4

3. The information of the stimulus is suspect. There are typically reasoning errors present, and you must read the argument very carefully

Question 5

4th rule to keep in mind when approaching these questions:

Answer 5

4. Weaken question often yield strong prephrases. Consider range of possible answers before proceeding to answer choices

Question 6

5th rule to keep in mind when approaching these questions:

Answer 6

5. The answer choices must be accepted as given, even if they include “new” information. Weaken answer choices can bring into consideration information outside of or tangential to the stimulus. Find the answer that best attacks the argument in the stimulus

Question 7

Weaken question stems typically contain the following two features:

Answer 7

1. The stem uses the word “weaken” or a synonym: Weaken, attack, undermine, refute, argue against, call into question, cast doubt, challenge, damage
2. The stem indicates that you should accept the answer choices as true, usually with the following phrase: “Which one of the following, if true,…”

Question steme examples:
“Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?”
“which one of the following, if true, most undermines the argument presented above?”

Question 8

How to weaken an argument: Premises

Answer 8

-One classic way is to attack the premises on which the conclusion rests
(This form of attack is rarely used on the LSAT because when a premise is attacked, the answer choice is easy to spot)

Question 9

How to weaken an argument: The conclusion

Answer 9

-The correct answer will undermine the conclusion by showing that the conclusion fails to account for some element or possibility
-Answers that weaken the argument’s conclusion will attack assumptions made by the author

Question 10

Common weakening scenarios: Incomplete Information

Answer 10

The author fails to consider all of the possibilities or relies upon evidence that is incomplete. This flaw can be attacked by bringing up new possibilities or information

Question 11

Common weakening scenarios: Improper Comparison

Answer 11

The author attempts to compare two or more items that are essentially different

Question 12

Common weakening scenarios: Overly broad conclusions

Answer 12

The author draws a conclusion that is broader or more expansive than the premises support

Question 13

Incorrect answer trap: Opposite answer

Answer 13

-These answers strengthen the argument as opposed to weakening it.
(Opposite answers lure the test taker by presenting information that relates perfectly to the argument, but just in the wrong manner)

Question 14

Incorrect answer trap: Shell game answers

Answer 14

-A shell game occurs when an idea or concept is raised in the stimulus and then a very similar idea appears in the answer choice, but the idea is changed just enough to be incorrect but still attractive
(The shell game is used to attack a conclusion that is similar to, but slightly different from, the one presented in the stimulus)

Question 14

Incorrect answer trap: Out of scope answers

Answer 14

-These answers simply miss the point of the argument and raise issues that are either not related to the argument or tangential to the argument

Question 15

Weakening conditional reasoning

Answer 15

-To weaken a conditional conclusion, attack the necessary condition by showing that the necessary condition does not need to occur in order for the sufficient condition to occur
(This can be achieved by presenting a counterexample or by presenting information that shows that the sufficient condition can occur without the necessary condition)