Weaken, Principle and Flaw

anna.buczek

I've gotten to a point where the only types of questions I'm missing are weaken, principle or flaw questions. I usually am on the right path to the correct answer but seem to be stuck between two answers almost overtime- and chose the incorrect answer very frequently. Any tips or pointers in what to consider when answering these types of questions?

hlsat180

Hi Anna:
Could you share any specific example problems along with your thought process on why, between two answers left, you chose the incorrect (instead of the correct) answer?

Without specific details you will get general hit-or-miss tips that may not necessarily apply.

GSU Hopeful

@anna.buczek Without further information, my generic answer would be to pick up a copy of The Trainer by Mike Kim. It will help tremendously in areas you are struggling with.

anna.buczek

@hlsat180 focusing mainly on principle and flaw, some that I have recently gotten wrong include: Principle: PT 54 Section 2 Q18 (answered A, correct answer was C), PT 54 Section 4 Q9 (answered B, correct answer was A); Flaw: PT 54 Section 2 Q15 (answered B, correct answer was E).

hlsat180

@anna.buczek:

Faced with two "acceptable" answers, seek out the WRONG answer. Both answers contain various correct elements (seemingly Could Be True) but one answer has an incorrect element (Must Be False) - to seek out and eliminate with extreme prejudice. So applied to your examples (broken up into two replies to make it easier to read):

hlsat180

PT54.S2.Q18 Although a Principle question, note both Answer A and C are logical condition statements. Therefore, one test is to quickly diagram for comparison:

Argument:
P: UI --> CE (Understand Issue --> Consider Evidence)
C: SP --> CE (Strong Position --> Conflicting Evidence); contrapositive Not CE --> Not SP

Answer A is a Mistaken Reversal (plus adds UI as a sufficient condition) and therefore Must Be False:
UI + CE --> SP

Answer C is compatible (being Assumption doesn't make it incompatible) and therefore Could Be True:
Not UI --> Not SP, contrapositive SP --> UI

Shortcut: Simply diagramming Conclusion then both Answers in closest format (LSAT often hides answers as contrapositives) is enough to identify Answer A's Mistaken Reversal.

hlsat180

PT54.S2.Q15 Flaws are tough questions because there are many possibilities and so there is a tendency to skip to the answer choices. Don't do this! BEFORE looking at any answers, take a moment and try to figure out what's wrong with the argument THEN proceed to review the answers. Often the right answer, although worded its own way, will pop out at you. You mentioned being pressed for time but this will help against avoiding baited wrong answers (like and leave you with better Contenders.

For example, Answer E addressed either of at least two flaws:

1. Logically, the argument incorrectly equates Not Always (0-99%) = Never (0%) Rational. In other words, just because Humans are not always rational, does it make them always irrational?

2. Mixes apples and oranges: The argument defines Rational in terms of Capacity, then uses examples in terms of Actions, then concludes Humans do not have the Capacity. For example:

P1: Humans supposedly have capacity for Good.
P2: But Humans have acted Evil!
C: Therefore, Humans do not have the capacity for Good. (See what's wrong?)

Hope this helps.