Having trouble identifying how assumptions play a role in LR stim's. I keep hearing 'inferences' and 'assumptions', pseudo-sufficient, sufficient, necessary in the content, but I am having trouble distinguishing the authors' vs my own assumptions (reasonably) to ID the correct answer choice. How do you go about ID'ing those inferences and/or assumptions to evaluate an argument's strength?? Any clarity is major appreciated!!!
In CO, would be open to study via zoom!! November test date
@aviemann would love follow up on this as well!!
@kyle.crail13@gmail.com looping in on this, i thought the same thing and would like clarity!
Reading through some of the comments, I think the easiest way to sum up assumptions on the LSAT is to look at the test (as a whole) as a separate world with separate rules than what we know. In our world, tigers are mammals, we know that. But in LSAT, tigers could conform to any kind of species unless explicitly stated otherwise. Approach each stimulus with suspicion and skepticism.
So, for these questions, are we analyzing the argument and identifying what the author is taking to be true?? I don't want to say 'condition', but also there's no other way to describe it lol