How to approach NA questions ... HELP!

emli1000

Hi guys,

I'm currently working through the NA questions and I am having a hard time understanding the concepts with bridging and blocking. I know that NA questions help strengthen an argument by a little. Barely. But somehow I feel that I need to weaken the argument when I get to the answer choices. I think I'm actually confusing the whole negate the correct answer choice process, right? Could someone better explain this to me?

blah170blah

I would check out Manhattan's explanation of NA question types. It's really improved my accuracy on the question types from like 50% to 90%.

Personally, trying to use lawgic to attack NA questions proved to be more of a hindrance. What's vital for NA question types more than any others (in my opinion) is not succumbing to bad habits. What that meant for me was forcing myself to understand the argument super well before moving to the answer choices.

Necessary Assumptions are assumptions that the argument makes, without which, the argument would be destroyed. So let's say we have an argument that says Drug A cures cancer. Why does the author believe that? A study showed 100 people took drug A and these people all got cured of cancer.

One necessary assumption is that these 100 people did not have a gene that eradicates cancer spontaneously after 10 years. Why? If they did have such a gene (negation test incoming), then that would mean this gene and not the drug caused the cancer to go away. Now, this is one of several assumptions that are required for the argument to hold.

I'm not necessarily sure if that's the best example but my point is that you MUST understand the argument very well (which means knowing the conclusion, and the support the author gives to convince you his/her conclusion is correct) to not go tripped up on NA types.

jdawg113

if you tweak the example and get rid of the "after 10 years" or threw in a time frame that the cancer was cured it might make a little more sense.

Ill use the example from Manhattan. Luis wants to buy a new sweater that costs $40 so he goes to the mall with enough money to buy it.
First, what is sufficient? anything saying Luis brought $40+. IE. Luis brought exactly $40. Sufficient? Yep, the sweater is only $40 so he has just enough. Is it necessary though? Nope, maybe he brought $41 or more. Its not needed that he brings EXACTLY.
Okay how about, Luis brings at least $20. Sufficient? Nooo, he could be $20 short, its not sufficient to know he has enough, maybe he only has $30. Is it Necessary? Absolutely, if he doesn't have AT LEAST $20 then how could he have $40?
alright then we got Luis has at least $40. Sufficient? Yup, $40 is all he needs and he has at least that.
Necessary? (hope ya got this) Yupppp, he NEEDS to have AT LEAST $40 in the same way he needs at least $20. Maybe he has more, but he absolutely cannot have less.

How about negating? Luis does NOT have at least $40(same for $20 AC). Well that kills it, again, if he doesn't have at least $40 then he doesn't have enough!

You aren't really looking to weaken, you're more looking to find something that you almost feel is silly bc its obvious (obviously its not so obvious) Remember, these AC are NECESSARY which means they are needed so they won't completely get you where ya wanna go, (imagine and -> ) it only fills up part of the arrow. Sufficient completely fills it in and gets you to the conclusion, but NA is simply enough as saying "Patients taking Drug A had not already been cured before taking Drug A" Like no sh** but is that necessary? Absolutely but are you going to glance over the (most likely more wordy) AC that says that? good chance.

Hope that makes sense lol #endrant

hrjones44

it's bascially the life support of the question, if u negate the answer choice that is correct, the argument falls apart.

emli1000

Thank you. I'm finishing up the lessons in the course today. Plus I still need to drill the problem sets. I think I'm slowly starting to understand them. But it's a very slow process

blah170blah

Thanks @jdawg113. I'm realizing how difficult it is to make solid questions off the cuff!

Alex Short

A key for my understanding is the way powerscore explains NA answer choices. Basically, your answer will come in one of two general forms.

The first, 'Supporter' ACs, act in a manner kind of like Sufficient Assumption ACs, in that they fill a gap, or provide a bridge from the premises to the conclusion. However, those are more simple questions in general. The 'Defender' AC is the one to really understand thoroughly. These choices are simply unstated premises necessary to the argument that defend the relationship defined by the argument. Hence the fact that the opposite of defending the argument becomes attacking (destroying) the argument.

NA give me trouble to this day - I think it actually is my weakest question type, but I've found that being able to (while reading the argument), determine if I should look for a supporter or defender definitely helps.

Good luck!
Alex

tsamvelyan

I don't know if anyone had this problem or I guess the solution, but whenever I get to NA answer choices, every answer choice I read, I ask myself "is this statement necessary". And it gets much easier because the word necessary says it all. But again, the supporter, defender stuff is great!