Weaken

Question 1

Most important strategy TO MAINTAIN ACCURACY in weaken QUESTIONS

Answer 1

In order to maximize your
chances of success you must identify, isolate, and assess the premises
and the conclusion of the argument.

Only by understanding the structure of the argument can you gain the perspective necessary to attack the author’s position.

Ensure you have properly mapped out the Conclusion first

MAKE SURE YOU MAKE LOGICAL CONNECTIONS AND CONNECT ALL FACTS TO THE CONCLUSION USING DIAGRAMING

Always prethink the assumptions and determine the one that is most critical to the conclusion.

WHAT YOU WANT TO WEAKEN IS THE LOGICAL LINK (& core Assumption) TO THE CONCLUSION. if an answer choice is talking about something not in the logical chain-assumption-conclusion you mapped out, its irrelevant

Question 2

To weaken a conditional conclusion ………

Answer 2

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.

When you have conditional reasoning in the stimulus and a Weaken question, immediately look for an answer that attacks the necessary condition.

Question 3

T/F?

Weaken is the most common type of CR question

Answer 3

True

Question 4

T/F?

A correct answer that weakens argument can bring in new information

Answer 4

TRUE

Remember: weaken is part of the “hurt” family where each option choice is taken as fact, and is meant to highlight a gap in the logic of the passage.

The point is to determine - does this new info affect the argument logically?

Question 5

T/F?

Correct answer to weaken the argument has to dispove the conclusion

Answer 5

FALSE

Most correct answers will not advertly “disprove” the argument, instead they will “cast doub or “decrease the pursuessiveness” of the argument

Question 6

T/F?

A correct “weaken” answer can attack premise

Answer 6

False

Any answer that attacks the premise can NEVER be correct. Premise is considered as FACT.

Question 7

The Correct answer to a weaken question …

Answer 7

1. Attacks the Assumption, a glue that logically links the premise to the conclusion, even though the premise is true
2. May not explitly say the assumption is false. Intead, it will “subtly” cast reasonable doubt on the validity of the assumption (logical link) → casting doubt on the conclusion/argment no matter how small.

the correct answer may be subtle but weakens

Question 8

What are the “weaken” indicators in question stem?

Answer 8

Which of the following , if true…. (indicates hurt/help), followed by certain key words;

weaken
attack
undermine
refute
argue against
call into question
cast doubt
challenge
damage
counter
evidence against
indicates a vunerability

Question 9

7 Types of “Correct answers” to “weaken” questions

Answer 9

1. Exposes a false dichotomy by offering a 3rd alternative
2. Calls into question a cause-effect conclusion
3. Shows that a generalization that supports an argument is faulty
4. Shows that a comparison used to support the conclusion is faulty
5. Shows that, in arriving at a conclusion, the author confused numbers and percentages.
6. Brings up new info that suggest that a plan will not work, when the conclusion says it will.
7. Indicates that a plan, which the argument concludes will not work, will actually work.

Question 10

Situation:

An argument incorrectly limits the number of possible conclusions/alternatives to 2.
It implies that just because one outcome is impossible, the other must be true.

How can this argument be weakened?

Answer 10

We weaken → By showing that there is an alternative posibility/explanation that the author has failed to consider

Assumption - There is no alternative path to an outcome occuring

Weakener- There is an alternative path to the outcome occuring

Question 11

Situation:

An argument presents facts that events A and B occured silmutenously/sequentialy or that there is a correlation between them. It concludes that A must have caused B.

How can this argument be weakened?

Answer 11

We weaken → By providing alternative explanations for the events by bringing new info that imply;

1. A causal relationship exists but its the reverse ie B →A
2. No causal relationship exist between A & B, instead a 3rd factor Z → A & B
3. The correlation is just a mere coincidence, and no causal relationship exists.

Assumption - the cause-effect claim is correct and there is no alternate explanation for the observed events.

Weakener- There is an alternative explanation for the observed events, and the claim may be incorrect

Question 12

Situation:

An argument presents facts that some members (at least one) of a group has certain characteristics , and implies that therefore all members of the group must have the same characteristic as well.

How can this argument be weakened?

Answer 12

We weaken →
* By providing info that implies that because some members of a group have a characteristic does not mean that all members of that group have that characteristic.
* By rendering the sample as “bi not representative of the overall population. Basicly it implies that the author is making faulty generalizations

Assumption - the small sample provides solid support for the conclusion on the overall population/group

Weakener- the sample is not representative of the overall population, and it is not the case in all members of a group/population/scenario.

Question 13

Situation:

An argument makes a comparison about 2 things that are fundamentally different . It uses this comparison to support its conclusion.

How can this argument be weakened?

Answer 13

We weaken → By indicatig that items in the comparison are different in key ways, the comparison may be faulty enough to not support the the conclusion.

Hint: when an argument is based on a comparison, the correct answer choice will most likely be about the comparison

Assumption - the comparison is logically correct and provides solid support for the conclusion

Weakener- the items being compared are different in key ways, so the comparison may be logically incorrect and not a solid support for the argument.

Question 14

Situation:

An argument provides statistical data (e.g. numbers and percentages) and makes a conclusion based on this.

How can this argument be weakened?

Answer 14

We weaken → by implying that data was not properly analyzed or not sufficient to support the conclusion.

if % are used, it will suggest that the % are misleading.

Assumption - the data is properly analyzed, and provides solid support for the argument.

Weakener- the data is misleading and not what it seems, and may not be enough support for the conclusion.

Question 15

Situation:

An argument presents a plan/course of action that should generate a desired/expected result

How can this argument be weakened?

Answer 15

We weaken → By bringing info that indicates that the plan may not work, or that taking the course of action will not generate the desired result.

The correct answers fall into the following categories;

1. The plan addresses one factor in the situation, the ans indicates there is another factor that the plan does not address
2. The ans indicates that the method the plan wants to use to solve a problem will make the problem worse in another way
3. if the argument concludes that a plan will work because a similar plan has worked before, the ans will show that the plan will not work because the current situation is different form the situation existing when the plan was prev used
4. The ans shows that the logic underlying the expectation that the plan will work misses a key aspect of how the situation works.

Assumption - the plan will work, and there is no malicious/unsuspected variable that will make the plan not to work.

Weakener- the plan will not work,

Question 16

Situation:

An argument says a plan will not work, or does not make sense

How can this argument be weakened?

Answer 16

We weaken → by providing new info that indicates that the plan will work. By showing an alternative path to success of the plan even with the facts in the argument suggesting otherwise.

Assumption - There is no alternative path to success, there is no way the plan wil work

Weakener- theres an alternate path (variable) the author did not consider that can actually make the plan work.

Question 17

When you are left with 2 choices in a “weaken” question….

Answer 17

look at your logical link (assumption) to the conclusion.
The option that most directly attacks the link ( assumption), is the best option.

Question 18

T/F?

A “better plan” or “alternative plan” always weakens an argument about plans.

Answer 18

FALSE

Its a TRAP answer and is mostly INCORRECT.

A better plan will never weaken an argument unless the assumption is based on the logic that “there is no better/alternative plan” instead of the usuall “there is no other factor that will make the plan not to work”.

Question 19

Incorrect “weaken” answer choices

Answer 19

1. Opposite answers - strengthen instead of weaken
2. Psaudo-weakners - be very suspicous of “some” , “most” , “many” in an ans choice. Just because some dont ≠ most dont. Everyone need not follow a pattern inorder to conclude that there is an overall tendency
3. Choices that weaken the support to a similar conclusion but in actuality the wrong conclusion
4. out of scope answers not relevant to the argument.
5. Answers that attack premises

Question 20

How to answer “Except” & “Not” weaken questons

Answer 20

4 incorrect answers - weaken
1 correct answer - not weaken

weaken - ❌
Not weaken - ✅

Question 21

When you have conditional reasoning in the stimulus and a Weaken question stem …

Answer 21

immediately look for an answer that attacks the necessary condition by showing that the necessary condition does not need to occur in order for the sufficient condition to occur.

TIP: in your head say “the answer choice will tell me that event A does not necerssarily require B to exit , to occur .

Question 22

How will you deal with eliminating between 2 close answer choices in “weaken” questions?

Answer 22

1.Understand the main Conclusion and restate it

2.Identify the core assumption : there may be more than 1. Identify the most critical to the conclusion. Always think about the assumptions made

3.Compare the scope of the answer choices:
Ask yourself - does this answer address the heart of the conclusion?
Always favor the option that addresses the core logical linkor has a stronger causal connection to the conclusion.

4.Eliminate the Lesser Weakener Using “But Can the Plan Still Work?”
Test Each Option Against the Plan - Ask, “Can the plan still work if this is true?”
The answer that completely undermines the plan is the stronger weakener.

5.Use Extreme Language or Scope to Refine Your Choice:
Language - Look for clues in the language. Stronger, more direct language usually points to the better weakener. Weaker language (e.g., “likely,” “may,” or “some”) - “propability” tends to dilute the weakening impact of an answer. Strong, decisive phrasing (e.g., “most,” “for the most part,” or “completely”) is often more impactful in weaken questions.
Scope - Strong weakeners attack the conclusion head-on, while weaker choices typically address tangential issues or less critical assumptions.