Trying to work them backwards and brainstorm the issue helped me.
There was one question I came across months ago.. something along the lines of children in America see over a million ads a year on television. (I barely remember the problem) Because of this Children in America are likely brainwashed by ads. (this is a terrible rephrase and example, but stay with me)
What is a sufficient assumption required for this argument?
So for this one we start with the conclusion "Children in America are likely brainwashed by ads" Okay where is the support for this? The support is they see over a million ads a year. Kind of weak.. right? But why is it weak?
Now we start to think like swiss cheese and poke holes in the argument. This argument assumes that the children actually stay and watched the tv during this time. It also assumes that just because someone is exposed to something, it effects them. If you can come up with more reasons, even better!
I come up with 1-3 before I even look at the answers. I would say 80% of the time one of the ideas I came up with is an answer almost word for word. The 20% of the time it is not, usually means I latched on to the wrong issue in the argument.
Disclaimers: I am not scoring 160s+ I am just a average 150s person, but this method has helped me.
For sufficient assumptions, in addition to everything everyone’s said, you should be able to pluck back in the answer choice, and the conclusion becomes a MBT.
Comments
Trying to work them backwards and brainstorm the issue helped me.
There was one question I came across months ago.. something along the lines of children in America see over a million ads a year on television. (I barely remember the problem) Because of this Children in America are likely brainwashed by ads. (this is a terrible rephrase and example, but stay with me)
What is a sufficient assumption required for this argument?
So for this one we start with the conclusion "Children in America are likely brainwashed by ads" Okay where is the support for this? The support is they see over a million ads a year. Kind of weak.. right? But why is it weak?
Now we start to think like swiss cheese and poke holes in the argument. This argument assumes that the children actually stay and watched the tv during this time. It also assumes that just because someone is exposed to something, it effects them. If you can come up with more reasons, even better!
I come up with 1-3 before I even look at the answers. I would say 80% of the time one of the ideas I came up with is an answer almost word for word. The 20% of the time it is not, usually means I latched on to the wrong issue in the argument.
Disclaimers: I am not scoring 160s+ I am just a average 150s person, but this method has helped me.
This video will help you tremendously
For sufficient assumptions, in addition to everything everyone’s said, you should be able to pluck back in the answer choice, and the conclusion becomes a MBT.
Thanks everyone!!