Sufficient Assumptions - Can't for the life of me figure out

lawandyodalawandyoda Live Member
edited February 2021 in Logical Reasoning 178 karma

I've wasted way too much time at this point on this section and can't for the life of me figure out SA questions.

To clarify - I have heard the definition of a sufficient assumption, many many times. As well as watched all of the videos and even read a Manhattan Prep explanation that I implemented and thought I hit a break through with.

But for some reason, it doesn't click in my head 100 percent when it comes time to apply it to a question.

Anyone else have difficulty with these/ willing to work on some together until we understand them so we can move on with our lives?

Any knowledge/insight/example/explanation would be greatly appreciated.

-- A tired military member

Comments

  • Kaso0726Kaso0726 Alum Member
    20 karma

    For SA, get super clear on the premises then read the conclusion (which shouldn't follow); then say to yourself..."That could only makes sense, if..." or "the only way that could be true, is if..." That's what I do.
    For NA, after getting crystal clear on the conclusion, I say to myself (in a sassy accent) "in order for that to be true, you must think that..."
    The formulas, formal logic, contrapositives, finding new terms in the AC's, tricks, etc. sometimes get in the way of just intuitively understanding the stim. Finally, do a lot of them. Good luck.

  • nwestfallpnwestfallp Member
    69 karma

    In SA, you are looking for the most powerful answer choice that you can find to 100% prove the conclusion valid. I really liked the Loophole's analogy that when thinking of SA, we should think of it as a way of building an ironclad bridge between the premises and the conclusion; the bridge is in the answer choice.
    The Sufficient Test: Does [assumption candidate] prove the conclusion? If yes, then you have correctly identified the assumption.

    This is also my weakest question type but the Loophole by Ellen Cassidy has definitely helped a ton.

  • WinningHereWinningHere Member
    417 karma

    I think often there is a definite gap in terms from the end of the premises to the beginning of the conclusion that is the gap and answer so look for that

  • teechj117teechj117 Core Member
    edited February 2021 291 karma

    I was right there with you. I would read every definition and hear example after example and it still wouldn't click. It seemed too abstract.
    Imagine you have to be at work and you need to be at your spot at exactly 5:00am in the morning. In fact, you're already there.
    Now imagine you have to explain how you got there and whatever you said was taken as 100% truth. It could range from the ordinary to the outrageous. The point is you were at your spot at 5:00am.
    1: You will carpool (could be true)
    2: You'll take the hoverboard (could be true)
    3: The fairy godmother will give you a ride on a magic carpet (could also be true)
    Any one of these is a sufficient assumption, so as long as it got you to your destination at 5:00am. What must be true is you'll wake up before 5:00am.

    When it comes to looking at a stimulus with a SA question type (key words being what's assumed), think of the choices or paths that could lead to the conclusion. This will leave the stimulus with no gaps, no holes, and no doubts.
    Another way to think of the sufficient assumption is that it justifies the conclusion. Any scenario (1-3) would justify you being at your destination at 5:00am.

    It took me probably three weeks of consistent drilling until I got it, so don't give up. Hope this helps

Sign In or Register to comment.