Can weakening or strengthening questions have valid conclusions

BlueRiceCake

A valid conclusions is a conclusions that's already 100% proven by it's premises. Can these questions ever be strengthened or weakened? Or do strengthening and weakening questions always have a stimulus with some error

lizzogonzo

If it's 100% then logically the stimulus is airtight and like you said, completely valid. Strengthen/Weaken questions will always have a logical flaw

BlueRiceCake

@lizzogonzo said:
If it's 100% then logically the stimulus is airtight and like you said, completely valid. Strengthen/Weaken questions will always have a logical flaw

Thank you I sometimes avoid looking for a flaw in strengthening and weakening because of the timing and fear that I'm wasting time on a valid argument. Gonna stop doing that

WinningHere

I'm not looking for flaw necessarily on strengthen or weaken, but rather looking to add to the support for the argument for strengthen. For weaken I am looking for alternative, causal argument, or reversal.

Logician

All the arguments in strengthen/weaken questions are invalid arguments. Remember, on the LSAT, you cannot directly attack the premises, you have to accept them as true. If these questions contained valid arguments, you wouldn’t be able to do anything without altering/attacking the premises (which you cannot do 99.9% of the time), because the premises would be forcing the conclusion to follow.