Flaw Questions

JRRLDG808

I took a PT last Saturday and based from the question stem analysis of the test grader (extremely helpful guys), flaw questions gave me the most trouble. What is the best way to approach them?

CJ Shin

Ah, flaw questions are tough because there is no set rule for approaching them.
Unless you know exactly what the flaw is, it can be very difficult.

When I do flaw questions, I tighten up on language and look for any slight shift in scope. For example, if the evidence loosely talks about a subject and suddenly employs language that indicates conclusiveness, there is obviously a problem with it.

The general guideline is to be more strict with the relationship between evidence and conclusion.
Ask yourself, is this evidence relevant? Is it adequate? Is it assuming something? Is it talking about the same thing as the conclusion?

Peter

I see flaw questions as the exact same as assumption questions. I ask myself "what do I need to assume to make this argument work." Then I look for the answer choice that basically says that assumption can't be made.

tri2k

I have been working on flaw questions for a few days and find myself having alot of trouble with them. I'm pretty much 50/50 on them and like Peter said, I have tried to approach them like assumption questions. In addition, i've tried looking at the answer choices one by one and asking myself is the argument doing this? However, I am finding that I am either stuck on two answer choices or that I am picking the answer choice that is wrong. Is there a much more concrete method to approaching these? I know it has been stated that there isn't in our conversations but there has to be something that can be a start in tackling these flaw arguments. Also, should I be spending so much time on these flaw questions? I feel that flaws in the arguments are a major part of the LSAT and if I can spot them in the flaw questions it would possibly help me get more points and quickly move on to the next question on the test.