Weakening Questions

theo1106

For some reason, I am having a lot of trouble for weakening questions in LR. For me, it is just intuitively hard to wrap my head around and go through the steps of finding unwarranted assumptions and harping on that rather than the argument itself. Therefore, I can get them right if I spend a lot of time on them, but end up half-assing answers when I am timed... Any tips to get over this issue?

Matt Sorr

I'd imagine this is a common trouble for many people when they're learning to tackle weakening problems (and really any LR questions that focus on assumptions). Laser-focusing on assumptions is not something we typically do, so it makes sense that it may not feel intuitive. The good news is that you can train yourself to feel comfortable dialing in on assumptions.

I have a couple of recommendations that I have found to help. These recommendations are by no means exhaustive and I'm sure many tutors/more experienced testers have more polished recommendations, but I can just tell you what has been effective for me. First, I find it useful to act as if you're a total jerk when doing weakening questions (and all questions that deal with assumptions). What I mean is act like an overly nitpicky, snobbish critic. Instead of reading an argument passively, try to really think about every single little logical gap you can come up with when reading how the argument's premises support its conclusion. Become the overly technical person that is annoying to deal with in common conversation because they make it a point to call out every little mispronunciation you commit or slightly incorrect thought you profess. This really helps me to "keep my eyes on the prize" and remember what my task is for weakening questions.

Second, I've found that simply watching a string of explanation videos, back to back, from experts like JY can help me to see how you should be approaching a question type. When I began attempting questions laden with formal logic, it just felt strange to me. Through watching how JY methodically approached each of the questions, however, I began to start modeling his thought process when attempting questions that were heavy on logic. After a large amount of drilling, it started to feel routine.

I hope this helps some!

ryan.lattavo

theo1106,

I really like what @matt sorr said about being the 'total jerk' person--approach the question with a skeptical mindset. Look for places to poke holes in the argument, be pedantic, etc. Further, I like to approach weakening questions like this:

1. Layout the argument. Make sure you're set on what the premises are and where the conclusion is.

2. Find a relatively unconvincing premises. This premise should feel weak to you, especially from a skeptical mindset. Something about it just seems not strong enough to support your conclusion. This is a good place to begin pre-phrasing

3. Using that premise that doesn't seem to support a conclusion strongly, head into the answer choices. When I read an answer choice, I think to myself "Does this answer make me less likely to believe the conclusion when taken directly with the other information in the stimulus?" Usually, the right answer in a weaken question will hone in on some weakness of the premises and expand upon it, so having good knowledge of the relationship between the premise and conclusion is a great place to start.

Thats a simple layout of how I go about answering these. Same method applies to strength questions, except they're the opposite of weaken. If you want to talk this further, schedule a tutoring consult and one of our tutors would love to help: https://calendly.com/7sage-tutoring/7sage-tutoring-free-consultation?utm_source=FCA_A

Respond here as well if you have further questions!