General Strategy Flashcards
What game plan strategy should you turn to if you’re down to two (2) answer choices in a flaw question & you’re stuck?
- Make sure BOTH answers are true (check logical force)
- Make sure it’s actually an issue (ask: “If I fixed that, would that make the argument better?”
- Check your conclusion
- Project forward.
Complete the following statement:
When authors use comparison or analogies to make their argument we have to ask whether _ _ _ _.
The things being compared are “relevantly similar” or “meaningfully different”
Explain the game plan to follow
When authors use comparison or analogies to make their argument in strengthen/ weaken/ necessary assumption
strengthen: find the answer that provides more sameness.
weaken: find the answer that points to important distinctions to weaken.
necessary assumption: sometimes you are forced to just complete the analogy.
What is the strategy for strengthen principle questions?
link evidence to judgement
* Be precise with judgement, get the judgment just right*
If premise then Judgement
Complete the statement
In MBT our AC is not going to be explicitly stated in our stimulus but _ _ _ _.
It will have the exact same scope, the exact same language & the exact same subject.
Define & give two (2) examples of
Correlated
definition: two things happening together.
Ex: Coincided
associated.
Define
Vague
using a word more than once, but slightly changing the meaning.
What are the three (3) ways to weaken a causal conclusion?
(expl. the outcome of each)
- same cause no effect (breaks the pattern)
- no cause same effect ( control group failing)
- identify an alternate cause.
What is evidence?
Facts &/or data that can be used to support a claim.
(verifiable through testing & observations)
Are assumptions considered evidence? Why or why not?
assumptions are NOT considered evidence.
- they are NOT verified or proven so they can’tbe used as a reliable soure to establish the truth.
What is an assumption?
Something that must be true in order for the conclusion to be proven by the premises BUT was never actually stated in the argument.
— “invisible glue the argument needs to connect the premises to the conclusion”
-usually opinions &/or beliefs that are accpeted as true without evidence.
- They are NOT veified or proven.
In logical reasoning, if our job is to be critical, the qualifiers in the conclusion will almost always _ _ _ . If a conclusion says something must be, expect that _ _ _ _, and if a conclusion claims something is most likely, expect _ _ _ _.
blank #1: be wrong
blank #2: it wont be
blank #3: that it won’t be
When a question asks you to pick between alternatives (ex: siding with one side you need to _ _ _ _.)
Know the criteria for the decision.
Ex: one alternative being more important than the other
POV you just ID QT as a MBT. What are you reading the stimulus for?
Reading for:
1. conditional lang
2. overlapping lang
3. strong lang/weak lang
overlapping language:
-same subject matter.
-same pieces of information but doesnt have conditional phrases (look for comonality)
- strong language.
Fill in the blank
To resolve a paradox, it is important to identify the two sides of the paradox & brainstrom what could account for the discrepency .
Often, such a resolution can be hinted at by _ _ _ _.
blank #1: a new term showing up on one side of the paradox.
Fill in the blank:
The _ _ _ _ closest to the conclusion is usually _ _ _ _. Especially if there’s _ _ _ _ / _ _ _ _.
- what’s the significance behind #4*?
1. premise
#2. the MOST important
#3. a connector word/
#4. connective tissue: shifts- indicates a change in direction so we gotta think “where did we come from to where are we going” -> where we are going to is the most important
What are the patterns to recognize for resolve/ explain questions & what do you need to anticipate for each?
1. Group or study similar but different end results: anticipate: Hidden relevant difference a.k.a 2 things being compared that are not comparable
anticipate: hidden negative
anticipate: hidden positive
anticipate: alt cause. need to be exact
What do common terms dictate?
There’s probably a transitive structure being created.
what is the game plan for ~MBT principle
(given principles as AC)
ID principle being used in stimulus, which conforms to the generality & treat like a ~MBT but anticipationis a bit more broad.
* Zoom out of the people, Zoom out of the subject They are a bit more broad.*
ID the type of question
Which one of the following if true, most helps to account for _ _ _ _?
& what is the key indicator?
explain question
Key Indicator: helps to account for
True or False
In a strengthen question where you’ve identified a causal relationship and the conclusiom argues against an alt. cause an answer that further eliminates the alt cause specified in the conclusion as a cause will work. aka be the correct answer.
true
How can you tell if the past will or will not affect the future?
& define the two circumstances that are being presented.
- mostly depends if events described are dependent or independent.
independent: past events have no effects on the future
dependent: past events do affect the future.
In a disagree question, sometimes you are going to be asked to probe a little deeper… How do you go about doing so?
(give an example)
Ask: “what does it mean for x’s argument if we believe y’s point is true?
ex: y’s point can undermine x’s premise in the argument, then the conclusion for x’s argument cannot be fairly drawn
Which reading frame do you need to apply to the following questions:
1.main point
2.describe
3.role
4.parallel
5.agree/disagree
reading for structure: (mp, describe, role, parallel, agree/disagree)
- sure to get a whole argument (premise & concl).
- As you are reading take notice of the structural elements that are happening in the argument.
Ask: 1. what kind of conclusion are you getting?
2. what kind of evidence are you getting?