Question about NA questions

Comments

• Sami Yearly + Live Member Sage ⭐ 7Sage Tutor

  January 2018 edited January 2018 10806 karma

  @sjkimkim said:
  So for necessary assumptions, the assumptions can be about the context, premise and conclusion? If the negation a statement attacks, say, the context of an argument, would this statement be a necessary assumption? Am I understanding this right??

  Depends -was the context necessary for the argument?
  When the context is negated in a answer choice will the conclusion no longer follow from the premises?

  The right way to think about NA is just to read the stimulus and understand how is the author supporting this argument and is the support enough?

  Most of the time there is a gap between the support and the conclusion and that's where the LSAT writers draw their right answer choice from.

  Some times the gap is not apparent and you have to use the answer choices to see if each answer choice is necessary for the conclusion.

  It really does depend on the way the author structures his argument. Sometimes the way the context is phrased can provide us clues about the noun of the conclusion etc. So I wouldn't discount context. But a better approach to NA questions would be to treat NA like a flaw question, where you just read and analyze the support and conclusion and think critically - do the premises actually support the conclusion? I would then use that knowledge to determine what answer choice would be necessary.
• JinnyKim Alum Member

  January 2018 37 karma

  @Sami said:

  @sjkimkim said:
  So for necessary assumptions, the assumptions can be about the context, premise and conclusion? If the negation a statement attacks, say, the context of an argument, would this statement be a necessary assumption? Am I understanding this right??

  Depends -was the context necessary for the argument?
  When the context is negated in a answer choice will the conclusion no longer follow from the premises?

  The right way to think about NA is just to read the stimulus and understand how is the author supporting this argument and is the support enough?

  Most of the time there is a gap between the support and the conclusion and that's where the LSAT writers draw their right answer choice from.

  Some times the gap is not apparent and you have to use the answer choices to see if each answer choice is necessary for the conclusion.

  It really does depend on the way the author structures his argument. Sometimes the way the context is phrased can provide us clues about the noun of the conclusion etc. So I wouldn't discount context. But a better approach to NA questions would be to treat NA like a flaw question, where you just read and analyze the support and conclusion and think critically - do the premises actually support the conclusion? I would then use that knowledge to determine what answer choice would be necessary.

  Thanks for the explanation! It helped a lot.
• TexAgAaron Alum Member

  January 2018 1723 karma

  I agree with @Sami. Focus on the argument being made. I struggled a lot with NA but a break through moment for me was when I really started focusing on the argument mainly, and only bringing in the context when necessary. Not saying to completely forget the context; be aware of it as you are reading the passage, but most of the time the NA will come from the argument portion.
• 1 Like

  JinnyKim Alum Member

  January 2018 37 karma

  @akeegs92 said:
  I agree with @Sami. Focus on the argument being made. I struggled a lot with NA but a break through moment for me was when I really started focusing on the argument mainly, and only bringing in the context when necessary. Not saying to completely forget the context; be aware of it as you are reading the passage, but most of the time the NA will come from the argument portion.

  Thanks for the advice! This definitely helps!