12/15/2023 0 Comments Blueprint lsatcharacterizations that describe an aspect of the fallacy incorrectly characterizations that miss an important aspect of the fallacy Prevalent fallacies that are not committed in the stimulus paraphrase the fallacy in your own wordsĬommon Characteristics of incorrect answers: Ask why the conclusion does not necessarily follow from the premises (keep in mind the prevalent fallacies) offering new evidence/ challenging an assumption (2nd perspective) Flaw A description of the fallacy committed in the stimulus undermining a premise or conclusion (generally 2nd perspective) proposing an alternate cause for an observed effect using a line of reasoning to draw an absurd conclusion descriptions that characterize part of the argument correctly, but either miss an important aspect of the argument or describe an aspect incorrectly Prevalent forms of argumentation (DESCRIBE) Rejecting alternatives prevalent argument forms that are not used in the stimulus read the response and look for one of the prevalent argument forms (generally the two speakers will disagree) look for weaknesses in the first argument identify the conclusion and relevant premise of the first argument How to approach the stimulus (two speakers) paraphrase how the argument supports the conclusion look for one of the prevalent argument forms identify the conclusion and relevant premises How to approach the stimulus (one speaker) subsidiary conclusions/ premises Describe An accurate description of the reasoning employed in the stimulus = a statement that is supported by premisses but that doe not itself support anything = expressions of the author's attitude or prescriptive statements (should, ought) do not hate time evaluating the validity of the argument look for evaluative statements that indicate the author's attitude look for words that indicate a shift in attitude (but, however) look for key works that indicate premise (since, because) and conclusions (therefore, thus, hence, so, it follows that) statements outside of the scope of the stimulus Main Point The main conclusion of the argument statements that could be true based on the stimulus, even if they are unlikely anticipate an answer choice that would violate these relationships look for relationships between the statements *anticipate a summary of the stimulus* MBF Definitively proven false by the statements in the stimulus hypotheses about the future or what would have happened if something changed ~MBT Very strongly supported by the information in the stimulus (doesn't absolutely need to be true) causes or explanation of phenomenon discussed in stimulus statements too strong/ outside of scope invalid conditional inferences (converse/ inverse) look for other relationships between the statements anticipate valid inferences (transitive conclusions, contrapositives) pay close attention to the logical force of the propositions Quantification: Possibility some, many, few, several (>0%) Logical force: Strong will, must, is, are, do, does, always, all, any, every, almost all Logical force: Moderate probably, likely, usually, most of the time, majority of the time, most, majority Logical force: Weak may, might, can, could, often, sometimes, occasionally, significant number, several, many, few,some Must be True Definitely proven true by the information in the stimulus (incorrect answers could be false)
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |