Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 32.1K All Categories
- 27.1K LSAT
- 16.5K General
- 5K Logical Reasoning
- 1.3K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 72 Podcasts
- 193 Webinars
- 9 Scholarships
- 193 Test Center Reviews
- 2K Study Groups
- 108 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.4K Specific LSAT Dates
- 4 June 2024 LSAT
- 1 April 2024 LSAT
- 11 February 2024 LSAT
- 23 January 2024 LSAT
- 37 November 2023 LSAT
- 41 October 2023 LSAT
- 12 September 2023 LSAT
- 38 August 2023 LSAT
- 27 June 2023 LSAT
- 1 August 2024 LSAT
- 30 Sage Advice
- 4.8K Not LSAT
- 3.9K Law School Admissions
- 11 Law School Explained
- 9 Forum Rules
- 574 Technical Problems
- 275 Off-topic
Related Discussions
2 Likes
"presupposing what it seeks to establish" meaning
evan.006
Member
For the LR sections and flawed question types, I've seen the answer choice "presupposing what it seeks to establish" quite often. My thought process for this choice is that the argument assume something that it needs to have first established, but that still isn't very clear to me. Can someone explain in better detail what this answer choice means? Thanks!
Comments
it's a circular argument. for example: "this essay is the best in the class because it is better than the other essays in the class." Even though "presupposition" makes you think there has to be an unstated assumption, it is usually a stated premise with an equivalent meaning in the conclusion.
It just means that the argument relies on assuming (presupposes) the truth of its main conclusion (what it seeks to establish).
Side questions Cuz curious: I read somewhere that circular reasoning answer choices are almost always wrong. I have no dog in this fight and I'lll check to make sure even if it is. I just wonder why they went with this one to be so often wrong. Maybe because it sounds convoluted and can trick lots of people confused by the other 4 answer?
The common flaw circular reasoning: in the argument there is a premise that is being use as a support for the conclusion that says the same thing as the conclusion, so you can not use the same thing to probe the conclusion. That is why presupposed what it seeks to establish.
Ex. I am smart because I am smart.
it's quite interesting; someone I know did an analytical dive into question frequency, and among the flaw questions, the flaw is rarely circular reasoning (it's more often a cause-correlation fallacy, some oddball version of an ad hominem, an exclusivity flaw, an equivocation/illegal concept shift, or an absence of evidence fallacy). And when the flaw is circular reasoning, the testmakers make the stimulus very subtle so that it's hard to detect on a first read.
Circular reasoning seems not to be frequently used on the LSAT for a similar reason that answer choices that deny the premise are not. At the base, both seem to be considered as cheap tricks.
Good point! Denying the premise=it's false because the evidence is false. Circular reasoning=it's true b/c the evidence is true.