RC Inference Questions as Necessary Assumptions?

danielbrowning208

Hi everyone,

I have found that inference questions have, by far, been my weakest point in RC, so I have been searching for a better way to understand the question type. It occurred to me that Inference questions in RC behave somewhat similarly to necessary assumption questions in LR. That is, it seems that if you negate the inference, it will "wreck" or at least be inconsistent with the part of the passage in which that bit of information appears.

How do others think about RC Inference questions, and does this analysis make sense?

agent699

I like the way you are thinking about inference questions! I'd have to give it a shot to confirm if it actually works as a technique. But I think different perspectives can be helpful on RC, regardless if is a 100% correct as a technique.

I have been thinking about inferences more generally when it comes to RC. It seems to me that every passage has an endless amount of inferences you can make from the information presented. Instead of doing this all up front after reading the passage, I'm trying to let the questions guide the more in depth inferences I make.

Anyways, not a direct response to your thought, but similar insofar as it is a different perspective on RC inferences.

Cheers!