Extreme words

TheCubicleEscapee

Thankfully, things are starting to click in regards to logical reasoning... I have a long uphill battle but for the most part I am starting to get somewhat comfortable with the type of questions.... I have just made one observation on LR questions however... I have picked up that "extreme words" are often not the correct question choice correct? Meaning.. words like only, never, always...

I am just trying to verify this before I train myself to think this way and then come to find out... I am way wrong. This whole process is cleaning out some serious cobwebs so if my question is weird that is why.

I also found that I was often falling for answers with these words in them, and the choices were wrong. I am constantly getting trapped by the LSAT haha I am just hoping I figure all those traps out prior to taking the actual LSAT Thanks guys!

Cant Get Right

Generally, this relates back to our valid/invalid argument structures. Why is strong language so often problematic? Well, it's because if we're dealing with "some" or "most" statements, we can't conclude with "all." You've just got to recognize what your task is. When answers with this type of language are wrong it's simply because they take the argument too far. They are rigid and allow for absolutely no wiggle room. This is appropriate for some arguments but not others. You've just got to be aware of the language in the stimulus.

I think SA and NA question types offer a good example. Extremes actually make for great sufficient assumptions. To use JY's basketball theme from the lessons: If you never failed to lead your team to win the NBA championship every year for 20 years then you are the greatest basketball player in history. So, that's a pretty extreme sufficient condition. But (in our world) it's totally sufficient, and no matter how much more extreme you make it, it will continue to be sufficient.

In the necessary condition this type of language is much more dangerous: If you are the greatest basketball player in history, then you never failed to lead your team to win the NBA championship every year for 20 years. This is not necessary at all. Maybe you won three championships in a row, took a year off to deal with some personal issues, then came back and won three more championships in a row. And that's still not necessary. Necessaries can be extremely weak: If you're the greatest basketball player of all time, then you, for at least some period of time, were able to maintain consciousness. So, that's weak. Which is great. The weaker the better for NAs, and the stronger the better for SAs. They love to throw around NAs so weak you hardly see how it applies.

So just make sure you know what you're being asked to do. Answer choices are quite often incorrect for this reason. It's one of their favorite tricks, and you are right to view these with skepticism when you see them. Just don't eliminate them just because the language is strong. Understand why strong language might be problematic in the question you're dealing with.

KevinSage

@"Cant Get Right" said:
So just make sure you know what you're being asked to do. Answer choices are quite often incorrect for this reason. It's one of their favorite tricks, and you are right to view these with skepticism when you see them. Just don't eliminate them just because the language is strong. Understand why strong language might be problematic in the question you're dealing with.

This nails it right on the head, know what you're being asked to do.. If it's a SA question, sometimes the "extreme words" will supply us with the correct answer choice.

TheCubicleEscapee

Ok. That makes sense, a lot of sense. I really feel like I am just cleaning out all this cobweb in my head... I investigate fraud for my job... so I deduce a lot of information and sometimes it is in fact wrong so I am really trying to NOT do that with the LSAT. It is getting easier but I am still falling for some traps which is why I am trying to break habits. If that makes sense.

MrSamIam

@"Cant Get Right" pretty much covers it all.
Yes, it is true that the LSAT writers will often use extreme wording in incorrect answer choices. It makes perfect sense that they would - if you wanted to contest a question or answer choice with extreme wording, the LSAC could just say "Well, it's not the case that 'x' NEVER does 'y'."

You do want to be careful going in with that mindset. There are a few instances where extreme wording is fine. For instance, on must be true questions - note: that doesn't mean every MBT question's correct AC will contain extreme language.
Just know what to look for and you'll be fine. For example, if a passage uses Lawgic and frequently uses the word "some" there's a good chance that the correct AC won't use extreme language.

Cant Get Right

@TheCubicleEscapee said:
I investigate fraud for my job... so I deduce a lot of information and sometimes it is in fact wrong so I am really trying to NOT do that with the LSAT. It is getting easier but I am still falling for some traps which is why I am trying to break habits. If that makes sense.

That makes total sense.

One thing that I had to really work on for the LSAT is that you’ve really just got to kind of blindly accept the premises as true. In life, I am a dedicated scientific skeptic and I don’t accept premises unless there is proof. My default mindset is to reject the truth of statements made without proof. (Great example: the dust is composed of 95% human skin thing. I know so many really smart people who have been really eager to accept this as true for some reason. Why!? Exhibit A: )

So this is a very real challenge for me. It takes a major shift in mindset. Sounds like with your work background, you’re probably used to looking at a fair amount of bullshit, so this might be something you’d need to overcome as well. In LSAT stimuli, you give the author the benefit of the doubt. You accept their statements as true unless there is a logical flaw. Even then, you accept their premises. You just recognize that their conclusion does not follow from those true premises. BTW @"J.Y. Ping” , I was actually disappointed your April Fools post wasn’t real. They should totally do that for for reals.