Differentiating Question Type's

Krithin S.

MBT V.S. MSS
Flaw V.S. Weaken

How do you differentiate between these question types by using the question stem? Sometimes, I mistake one for the other...

Thanks in advance

ryanriger

Are you wondering what each of these questions asks you to do? Or are you asking how to tell when the question is asking you to find the flaw, weaken the argument, etc.

Burden.of.Floof

You can memorize the typical stem associated with the type. For example:

MBT: "Which one of the following statements follows logically from the statements above?"
MSS: "Which one of the following is most strongly supported by the information above?"
Weaken: "Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?"
Flaw: "The reasoning in the argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that the argument"

etc., etc. finding example question stems for each question type are pretty easy, I know JY breaks them down in the CC.

I think another way to approach it is to understand what each question type is really asking you to do, then regardless of the wording of the question stem, you'll understand what your task is.

For instance, with MBT and MSS, they're not far off from one another. In both cases you're pushing out an inference in the stimulus and finding it in the answer choices. The difference between MBT and MSS has to do with provability. While both answer choices most be provable in the stimulus, your answer in a MBT has to be 100% ironclad valid. Whereas MSS has to be, pretty much true... there is tiny wiggle room there. It will definitely be the most strongly supported AC out of the options you're given. This is then reflected in the language of the question stem. MBT question stems will use language like "must be true" and "follows logically," indicating that very high bar of validity. Whereas MSS questions will use language like "most, strong, support." (Hence the name of the question type)

With Flaw and Weaken, your tasks are pretty different, and the question stem will also reflect this. Weaken questions task you with finding a powerful answer that will destroy the premise-conclusion relationship. You get there by analyzing the argument and finding a flaw, then exploiting it to come up with something that would drive a wedge in that relationship. Flaw questions also task you with finding what is wrong with the argument, but instead of inserting an idea that will destroy the argument, you have to essentially be able to articulate why the reasoning in the stimulus has issues. Again, reflected in the question stem: Flaw questions will ask you to take a more... "dignified approach." They'll ask you why the argument is vulnerable to criticism. Weaken questions will just ask you to go in there with a bulldozer, they'll ask you to find the answer that undermines or weakens the argument.

yunonsie

Great points above!

I've drilled question stems before. As in, I go through the LR of old PTs, read the question stems, and write down what I think they are asking for. I don't even go through the stimuluses or answer the questions, but it helps! Esp when it gets to the end of a section and my ability to focus wanes.

elliaddagan

I agree with everything BurdenofFloof says. (great name btw) Recognizing question type comes with practice, but more important than recognizing and categorizing is understanding what it actually means to you. How you should approach the problem, and what you are looking for changes depending on the question type and that is essential to success. Do not get carried away with categorizing different question types, they are all very similar at their core. Find the gap!!