Critical Reasoning (CR)

Question 1

CR Technique?

Answer 1

1. ) Read the question stem
2. ) Read prompt
3. ) Find conclusion
4. ) Find premise
5. ) Attack based on question type

When in doubt, rephrase question as “if X, therefore Y”
X = premise
Y = conclusion

Question 2

Ways to ID conclusion (5)

Answer 2

1. ) Synonyms/Trigger Words
2. ) V.H.H.
3. ) S.I.B adjacency
4. ) Thick question stem
5. ) In the answers

Question 3

Boldface Questions = what role does the bolded portion play?

Answer 3

Acknowledge the hater

Know triggers for conclusion and premise words

Group answers accordingly and eliminate based on mismatch.

Question 4

Strengthen / Paradox / Complete the passage / Resolve the Argument

Answer 4

Consider how/why the argument stinks

Goal is to ADD a premise that strengthens / completes conclusion.

P’s must support EVERYTHING the conclusion proposes.

*Consider P’s and C’s only

Question 5

Assumption Questions

Answer 5

Build T-table:
– Find Mismatch b/t P + C…answer is needed to fix/negate.

– Use negation (plug answers into assumption box, should kill conclusion)

– Know Common Assumptions tested.

Question 6

Common Assumptions (6)

Answer 6

Correlation (Causation)
One way (To do something)
Stats
Terms (interchangeably)

Topic (On/Off)
Necessity (Sufficiency)

1. ) Stats (can be trusted…percent changes = actual value)
2. ) Correlation = Causation
3. ) Terms interchangeably
4. ) Necessity for Sufficiency
5. ) On/Off topic
6. ) Only one way

Question 7

Weaken Questions

Answer 7

Find the flaw/mismatch:
– A) Attack / kill a premise or assumption
(know common assumptions)

– B) Provide alternate explanation
(ie agree with conclusion but for a different reason)

T-table can help ID a word mismatch.

Question 8

Conclusion Questions

Answer 8

Find the best last sentence, often containing elements of premises from prompt.

Answers = conclusions
Everything in prompt = premise

Answer must be hyper relevant to passage

Question 9

Evaluate Questions

Answer 9

Ask the best question.

Line up P’s and poke them - ie check structural integrity - where is the assumption or hole in the argument.

Words/descriptions must matchup!!