#### Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

# Difference Between 'Principle Justify' Questions and 'Sufficent Assumption' Questions

Alum Member
222 karma

Hi guys, I have trouble distinguishing between the so called 'pseudo sufficient' questions where you are asked to use one of the following principles to justify the conclusion vs. a regular sufficient assumption question. Can someone please explain or distinguish the steps to doing them? Thanks!

Show Related Discussions

• #### How to tell the difference between just argument and causation weakening questionsCould someone clarify the best way to tell the difference between weakening questions where the argument is a simple argument and where the argument …

• Member
147 karma

I guess the easiest way to distinguish between them would be this: when the question stem says which of the following MOST helps to justify then thats a PSA question.

when it mentions: which one the following if assumed would help justify the argument then thats a SA question.

Be on the lookout for the word MOST, that is what differentiates the two.

• Alum Member
2804 karma

"Most helps justify" is the most common type of PSA question stem. These differ from SA questions because the credited answer choice will not need to be sufficient to make the argument completely valid.Remember validity means that the conclusion 100% must be true based on the premises. SA questions will get you there, while PSA will generally get you extremely close, if not exactly there. I have found a lot of "Most helps justify" stems do have correct answer choices that make the argument valid, however, the wording of the stems does not mean they must be valid.

Approaching PSA questions like SA questions is how I improved on them significantly. My original approach was looking at them as strengthening questions, however, the support required is generally more than a traditional strengthening question.I found that these questions become really formulaic and easy to see if you really focus in on what the argument is concluding and find the answer choice that gets the premise there. There is a great webinar about PSA questions. Here is the link: https://7sage.com/webinar/jimmy-psa/

• Free Trial Member
2043 karma

@"Lucas Carter" is correct. PSA questions are slightly different from SA questions due to not needing to be fully sufficient, but honestly the vast vast majority of the time the PSA credited correct answer might as well be the correct answer for an SA question as well. Treat them as the same and don't worry about differentiating them.

• Alum Member
1777 karma

So it looks like you have some good advice on here. What I will add is that there are two quizzes in the CC that can really help with identifying question stems, as well as flash cards. I like to make my own flash cards, actually.

• Alum Member
edited September 2018 568 karma

Agreed with the above responses. I approach principle PSA pretty much the same way I do an SA question because they're so similar. The only difference is that an SA answer choice makes the argument completely airtight/valid, whereas a PSA comes really close, but the test writers probably just want some wiggle room to avoid liability.

Here's an example (an analogy of a question I just did): "The proposed law is vague and can be subject to different interpretations depending on the special interests of the individual. Therefore, the mayor can abuse the proposed law, if it passes, for his/her own personal gain."

An SA answer choice would be, "If a law is vague and subject to multiple interpretations, then the mayor can abuse it." This is P → C, which makes the argument valid.

A PSA answer choice would be, "The power to interpret the law belongs solely to the mayor." I don't think this makes the argument valid, but it sure does come close. It's just a small jump from "sole power to interpret" to "can interpret in a way that's for one's personal gain."