Assumption vs. Causation questions

Comments

• paulmv.benthem Alum Member

  June 2018 1032 karma

  Hmmm...I'm not quite sure I understand your question. If you can elaborate a bit, I'll do my best!
• 321raymoney123 Alum Member

  June 2018 49 karma

  There are two separate groups of lessons on the syllabus - one for assumption questions and one for causation/phenomenon-hypothesis questions. This has led me to believe that within weakening questions, these are two different sub-types. For weakening questions, it is my understanding that for some (assumption questions) we should attack an assumption that is made, while for others (causation questions) we should attack the fact that the author says x causes y when in reality that is not necessarily the case (y could cause x, z could cause x and y, or there could simply be no relation between x and y). My confusion is whether or not these are two separate questions, or if I should instead always be looking for an assumption that is made and causation is a tool to attack that assumption. I also need advice on how to identify causation questions vs. assumption questions if they are separate question types within weakening/strengthening questions.
• NovLSAT2019 Alum Member

  June 2018 620 karma

  Causation weakening = bring in alternate explanation
  Causation strengthening = block alternate explanation
• 1 Like

  paulmv.benthem Alum Member

  June 2018 1032 karma

  Unfortunately, there's no simple answer to your question. As you continue to famialize yourself with the assumption questions and strengthen/weakening questions, it will become easier.

  That being said, you note,

  @huntershaw98 said:

  This has led me to believe that within weakening questions, these are two different sub-types.

  I think it's best not to think of causation questions as being a distinct question type. In the CC, J.Y. provides a strong understanding of what is being logically stated when an author postulates a causal relationship within an argument, but this type of relationship will be outlined in a variety of stimuli across the question type families. Oftentimes, in the case of a strengthening/weakening question, you'll find that a causal relationship is being advocated within the stimulus by some speaker. So, it's not a causation vs. assumption, but rather, in some instance an author will outline a causal argument, but your job in attacking an assumption question would be to find the AC that allows this causal argument to be properly drawn, or at least moves it in that direction conclusion.

  Hopefully that helps! For myself, when it comes to understanding the fundamentals of weakening strengthening questions, I found this webinar IMMENSELY helpful. (https://7sage.com/webinar/weaken-strengthen/) Nicole does a fantastic job of outlining the basic logic of strengthening/weakening questions as they appear on the LSAT and an effective strategy for tackling them. Good luck!

  Ask away if you got any other questions!