Help translating answer choices in flaw questions...

LSATcantwin

I have found a pattern of question I continuously get wrong. I think I know why I get it wrong too. In part it's not having a clear enough understanding of exactly which flaw I am seeing, but the other part is I can not understand what the heck the answer choices mean. An example of this question type is 49.2.18 (test, section, question).

The answer choices say thing like;

E.) Takes for granted that a phenomenon that can best be understood as having certain properties can best be understood only through reasoning that shares those properties. ---------- What did the test just say to me? Should I be offended? Is it insulting my mom?

Or

C.) Fails to distinguish adequately between the characteristics of a phenomenon as a whole and those of the deliberately isolated parts of that phenomenon. ---------- I think it's saying "Doesn't show the difference between the whole and the parts" but I am not sure.

These answer choices appear on every test, in one convoluted way or another, and each time I trip fall, pick a bubble and move on.

Advice for unpacking these answer choices, and maybe to addressing flaws better?

gioaragon95

So I am going through the flaw sections in the CC and I find it best to take this section slow because knowing the flaws in terms of their theory and what they really mean, and also why they are wrong is important to understand. When you really take the time to understand circular arguments, Part to whole and whole to part (which sound like the problems you described) then you can begin seeing patterns and really see why ac are correct or wrong.

When you really learn argumentative flaws then the ac become clear. Yes they do become convoluted by the degree of difficulty but as you noticed in most cases they have a certain word attached to that type of flaw which can help you identify the correct answer.

Also, truly understanding flaws and knowing them like the back of your hand can help you see why an argument made is weak. Thus, when you are stuck between two answer choices, you can begin to see that "yes, though the argument failed to do this. This is still not the reason why this argument is fundamentally wrong."

It probably takes more time. Since really learning anything new often does. But I think it is well worth it and the pay off if done right might save you time and mental energy while taking the exam. Since by then you should know what a bad argument looks like and why it's wrong.

I would say really learn these flaws well. Go on the internet. Go on youtube see and read the theory behind the flaw of composition and division(Part-to-whole/whole-to-part) and others to really master and understand theses flawed ways of making an argument.

It takes a little more effort and time lol trust me.
But it does lead to a more richer understanding in my opinion and also helps with your LSAT mindset.

my two cents.

LSATcantwin

Thanks, I am definitely working on identifying flaws better and understanding what they mean. Maybe that will help, but when I read those answer choices I just become lost. The wording really throws me off the trail of the right answer.

gioaragon95

Yea, maybe just try and break them down in BR. When I don't understand an AC i just take the AC apart word for word. If I don't know what phenomena means i look it up and if i don't understand what they mean by properties then I try and understand how it's being used. Eventually you can almost mentally understand what it generally means.

How i read this with the practice that i said above,
"Takes for granted that a phenomenon that can best be understood as having certain properties can best be understood only through reasoning that shares those properties.

Breakdown
Assumes that an event can be best understood by having certain characteristic qualities since the only way to understand this phenomena is through reasoning that also share these exact same characteristic/qualities.

More of a breakdown...
- You can best understand an event only through other such events that share similar properties.

I don't have the stim on me but that's how i read it.