I thought "some" statements don't have the ability to strengthen or weaken?

LRLang26

I've seen lots of debate over whether or not some statements have the ability to strengthen or weaken arguments. The general consensus seems to be that they cannot strengthen or weaken, however, I came across prep test 29, section 1, question 16 on Proto-Indo-European languages where the correct answer to this weakening question was answer choice B, which was a some statement. I'm not sure if we can post questions in their entirety so I'll just say what the answer choice states and hope anyone with this full question and some good insight can reply "Some languages lack words for prominent elements of the environments of their speakers." My analysis is that while this may be true why does it have to apply to the group referred to in the stimulus? It could just as easily not apply to the group referred to in the stimulus, in which case it would not weaken the argument. Why should I have to make the assumption that the answer choice applies to the group referred to in the stimulus? If anyone can clarify for me it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Pacifico

I don't see any reason why some statements couldn't be used to strengthen or weaken arguments. Surely they make for weaker agents of strengthening or weakening based on their very nature, but if no other statements fit the mold, then why couldn't that just be a really weak (but correct) answer. As the text explanation states on this page: http://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-29-section-1-question-16/ the correct AC attacks the universality of the role of language that the argument states. It doesn't matter if it applies directly to the group or not, so this is actually a great example of how some statements can in fact be used to strengthen or weaken arguments since they can help refute universality in arguments. And in this case, all the other ACs are pretty off base and none of them weaken the argument. Not sure if you can access that link but there's a great explanation there. Hope this helps!

DumbHollywoodActor

I’m not sure where you’re getting that from. 7Sage, as far as I remember (please feel free to correct me if I’m wrong), doesn’t advocate such knowledge. I’m fairly certain that a “some” statement can strengthen and weaken an argument, especially on the EXCEPT questions. Weaken and Strengthen correct answers don’t have to invalidate or validate, respectively, their arguments. They only need to thin out the support between the premises and the conclusion.

Pacifico

@DumbHollywoodActor makes a great point, and I think 7Sage is often very hesitant to make blanket statements like "some statements can't weaken or strengthen arguments" since there are almost always exceptions to such things, though I'm sure there are plenty of prep courses out there that teach something this ridiculous as a rule.

LRLang26

Ok thanks guys that really clears it up and that's kind of what I thought made the most sense. 7sage didn't talk about it, it was just what I saw in other people's comments and silly me, i was starting to buy into it.

nicole.hopkins

@DumbHollywoodActor said:
Weaken and Strengthen correct answers don’t have to invalidate or validate, respectively, their arguments. They only need to thin out the support between the premises and the conclusion.

*Some* of the time (heheeee), "some" or "many" statements might prove to be pretty weak contenders for answer choices. Modifiers like these can serve as "red flags" to look for possible additional reasons to eliminate that AC, or at least to consider the alternatives (though we always do this if strictly following POE). If none of the other AC's weaken/strengthen/obey the stem at all, then sure, you can have a correct AC with "some" or "many."

TL;DR: "Some" is not always a reason to eliminate AC's, but inclusions of this kind of modifier might be a given AC's Achilles' heel.