For those struggling with W questions, one thing that I do is place the phrase "What if..." before every answer choice. This reinforces the fact that you are trying to weaken the argument's strength specifically by exposing the logical gaps within it. It also helps me psychologically, as I perceive each answer choice as a rebuttal to the author's conclusion. When you apply the phrase to all choices, it makes it easier to weigh the weakening "blow" between the other answers, which clarifies which choice is blatantly ineffective. Hope this helps!
A trick is to filter out the original conclusion and think, "what could be another explanation to this phenomenon" which almost always weakens the original conclusion.
weakening / strengthening questions are sneaky hard (some of the hardest of the test) -- practice makes perfect!!! don't get down on yourself for not getting it first try, these types genuinely do require repetition & having a much more flexible thought process than other questions!
Honestly, sometimes if you're struggling its burn out. Take a day, do absolutely nothing or things you like and FEEL NO SHAME ABOUT IT. Give yourself some GRACE and a break. I promise you when you return the next day to study you will feel and see the difference.
I just have to say, when I first started 7sage, I thought JY's process of going through the stimulus was tedious and redundant.... but oh how I was wrong. If you are struggling on any LR question, I STRONGLY recommend practicing breaking up the stimulus into its parts and working through the grammar. Ever since I have applied the techniques taught to us of how to parse through the grammar, I have not gotten stuck on a question for the sake of not understanding. For example, grammatically tough passages or those that use really obscure or intense topics (like some specific technology or biological process that I've never heard of) would take me forever because I would just sit there trying to literally understand them.... but now I know I don't have to remotely get what the actual topic they're discussing means. As long as I can parse through the grammar, I can nail any question!
You are so right! I was just thinking about this the other day. I would always get stuck with questions that involve really complex science topics, but now I can parse through them and understand the logic, even if I don't have a clue about the topic.
I kept missing them until my strategy was simply - what is an alternative explanation that follows from the stimulus?
Though I was using the above strategy before I would then add an extra check and ask myself whether the conclusion/hypothesis stated in the stimulus was now incorrect b/c of the answer choice I selected. This was getting me all messed up.
Now I strictly just think of the following as a rule: identifying an alternative explanation = no reason to believe the stated conclusion/hypothesis in the stimulus
I no longer hyper fixate about whether or not I actually took the support away from the latter. In my mind, it's just a rule that I need to follow - without questioning it. And this helps me get the right answer.
I was getting these questions wrong b/c I would overthink and it would lead me astray but this strategy counters my overthinking.
I had this same issue with other question types. I looked at approaches/explanations from other sources and realized that JY's explanations just didn't click for me on those particular question types. I highly recommend just looking up other ways to approach the specific question type.
Remember, y'all, if this section doesn't come easily to you, that is okay! Knowing where you struggle should give you confidence in your study path. You know where to work, you just gotta do it, and the ease will follow with time. Know thy enemy!
I think the confusion in this one comes from the conclusion being so general in relation to the premise. The premise and the correct answer has a considerably stronger support than the initial conclusion in the stim.
Sometimes in weaken questions it's better to ignore the conclusion in the stim and just figure out what is the strongest conclusion in the answer choices. Kind of thinking of it like a most strongly supported question in your mind.
I lowkey felt like A was too obvious so I literally crossed it out both times. I was like nah this is too obvious and makes too much sense, theres no way its the answer...great
I did the exact same thing. I chose A immediately, deliberated for almost two minutes, and talked myself into a different answer that I didn't feel confident about at all.
I understood answer choice A ("People correctly believe that technical innovations often cause job loss") to be an example of "social inertia", therefore strengthening the argument, which caused me not to choose it. I ended up choosing C, but wasn't confident with this answer either but I'm still having trouble understanding how A weakens the argument???
I also chose C and don't understand how A is the correct answer. Even with the explanation in the video, I don't get how A undermines the stimulus of "Social inertia....."
AC A is offering an alternative hypothesis. It's not required to know what "social inertia" is here. All we need to know is that AC A offers an alternate hypothesis to the particular scenario in the stimulus. Instead of resisting due. to social inertia, AC A states that the resistance is there because of a fear of losing jobs. Answer choice C references. a scenario we shouldn't even care about. The stimulus references people who resisted, why should we care about the people who did not resist? In addition, it is fully possible that some people embraced technology in this scenario. The stimulus mentions there are "plenty of examples" of people resisting, but it does not say that "all" people resisted.
AC A provides an alternative hypothesis that instead of "social inertia" being the reason people resist, it is the correct belief that new tech causes job losses.
137 comments
For those struggling with W questions, one thing that I do is place the phrase "What if..." before every answer choice. This reinforces the fact that you are trying to weaken the argument's strength specifically by exposing the logical gaps within it. It also helps me psychologically, as I perceive each answer choice as a rebuttal to the author's conclusion. When you apply the phrase to all choices, it makes it easier to weigh the weakening "blow" between the other answers, which clarifies which choice is blatantly ineffective. Hope this helps!
Actively getting my ass handed to me here.
A trick is to filter out the original conclusion and think, "what could be another explanation to this phenomenon" which almost always weakens the original conclusion.
yes this is 100% accurate! It helped me crack this question.
Like if you have gotten zero drills right in this section so far :)
weakening / strengthening questions are sneaky hard (some of the hardest of the test) -- practice makes perfect!!! don't get down on yourself for not getting it first try, these types genuinely do require repetition & having a much more flexible thought process than other questions!
Honestly, sometimes if you're struggling its burn out. Take a day, do absolutely nothing or things you like and FEEL NO SHAME ABOUT IT. Give yourself some GRACE and a break. I promise you when you return the next day to study you will feel and see the difference.
@AngelicaAnzaldi Agree heavily! also doing shorter study sessions help too
I just have to say, when I first started 7sage, I thought JY's process of going through the stimulus was tedious and redundant.... but oh how I was wrong. If you are struggling on any LR question, I STRONGLY recommend practicing breaking up the stimulus into its parts and working through the grammar. Ever since I have applied the techniques taught to us of how to parse through the grammar, I have not gotten stuck on a question for the sake of not understanding. For example, grammatically tough passages or those that use really obscure or intense topics (like some specific technology or biological process that I've never heard of) would take me forever because I would just sit there trying to literally understand them.... but now I know I don't have to remotely get what the actual topic they're discussing means. As long as I can parse through the grammar, I can nail any question!
You are so right! I was just thinking about this the other day. I would always get stuck with questions that involve really complex science topics, but now I can parse through them and understand the logic, even if I don't have a clue about the topic.
Have gotten every single weaken question in this section wrong so far lmao
you got this! i believe in you :) si se puede
I kept missing them until my strategy was simply - what is an alternative explanation that follows from the stimulus?
Though I was using the above strategy before I would then add an extra check and ask myself whether the conclusion/hypothesis stated in the stimulus was now incorrect b/c of the answer choice I selected. This was getting me all messed up.
Now I strictly just think of the following as a rule: identifying an alternative explanation = no reason to believe the stated conclusion/hypothesis in the stimulus
I no longer hyper fixate about whether or not I actually took the support away from the latter. In my mind, it's just a rule that I need to follow - without questioning it. And this helps me get the right answer.
I was getting these questions wrong b/c I would overthink and it would lead me astray but this strategy counters my overthinking.
Hope this helps :)
I had this same issue with other question types. I looked at approaches/explanations from other sources and realized that JY's explanations just didn't click for me on those particular question types. I highly recommend just looking up other ways to approach the specific question type.
Remember, y'all, if this section doesn't come easily to you, that is okay! Knowing where you struggle should give you confidence in your study path. You know where to work, you just gotta do it, and the ease will follow with time. Know thy enemy!
Did it in 34 seconds. YAY!
I struggled sooo much with MBT and RRE but am on an honor run with weaken questions--timing and accuracy is near perfect
WE each have our own unique strengths and weaknesses--don't judge yourself by the sections you struggled most on!
i feel so stupid with how much i've been struggling with this question type 😭 then hearing the explanation makes so much sense i feel silly.
@mzughaerr I am in the same boat as you
I hate these questions.
I am really struggling with this section
seeing the percent of people who picked the same answer as me and it reads "1%" puts me in full depression
The way the question was worded was absolutely atrocious
For real. I had to simplify the subject before slowly reading the descriptors.
I think the confusion in this one comes from the conclusion being so general in relation to the premise. The premise and the correct answer has a considerably stronger support than the initial conclusion in the stim.
Sometimes in weaken questions it's better to ignore the conclusion in the stim and just figure out what is the strongest conclusion in the answer choices. Kind of thinking of it like a most strongly supported question in your mind.
WOW! Studying for this exam with English as a second language really tests one's patience. We got this though.
i was like wtf is a social inertia lolol
I lowkey felt like A was too obvious so I literally crossed it out both times. I was like nah this is too obvious and makes too much sense, theres no way its the answer...great
@jrm98 LOL might just be your brain getting better at spotting right answers and your confidence being like neh...
my last comment was telling myself to trust my instinct. i chose a and then talked myself out of the right answer
I did the exact same thing. I chose A immediately, deliberated for almost two minutes, and talked myself into a different answer that I didn't feel confident about at all.
man this is the question type i am gonna struggle with
i hate weaken questions
I got it right but wow A felt like a bait answer.
i felt the exact same way!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJJom2YX2zk
This one really had me feeling confused...
I understood answer choice A ("People correctly believe that technical innovations often cause job loss") to be an example of "social inertia", therefore strengthening the argument, which caused me not to choose it. I ended up choosing C, but wasn't confident with this answer either but I'm still having trouble understanding how A weakens the argument???
I also chose C and don't understand how A is the correct answer. Even with the explanation in the video, I don't get how A undermines the stimulus of "Social inertia....."
AC A is offering an alternative hypothesis. It's not required to know what "social inertia" is here. All we need to know is that AC A offers an alternate hypothesis to the particular scenario in the stimulus. Instead of resisting due. to social inertia, AC A states that the resistance is there because of a fear of losing jobs. Answer choice C references. a scenario we shouldn't even care about. The stimulus references people who resisted, why should we care about the people who did not resist? In addition, it is fully possible that some people embraced technology in this scenario. The stimulus mentions there are "plenty of examples" of people resisting, but it does not say that "all" people resisted.
AC A provides an alternative hypothesis that instead of "social inertia" being the reason people resist, it is the correct belief that new tech causes job losses.
I was feeling that as well. "Social inertia" is extremely vague/broad. Bad question.
lol i had to do a dirty google and figure out wth 'social inertia' is...
@Sunday_Blues13 Me too!!! Probably what made me a minute over ...