#### Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

# Is a "premise booster" or "restated premise" answer ever correct?

Member
245 karma

For strengthening questions, we know that we need to defend the argument by:
-Strengthening data in stim i.e. survey results, data, and showing that there are no mistakes with data.
-For causal:
->Eliminate alternate causes
->Prove when cause occurs so does effect
->Show that relationship is not reverse

So my question now is, for strengthening questions that include a premise booster or restate that a premise is in fact true, will this ever be the correct AC?

It seems to me that it won't, but I don't really understand why since it seems that this would fall under the first bullet for strengthening an argument. However, I have yet to see it be correct ever. I am scoring in the low 170s and when I fall for this "premise booster" AC, it's always wrong and I feel stupid for choosing it. I think it's because I don't really understand how affirming the premise's truth doesn't strengthen an argument.

Can anyone #help me understand?

Show Related Discussions

• #### PrepTest 16 - Section 3 - Question 15 (Most Difficult) 'Tall' is a relative term (C is correct)A tall tulip is not a tall plant. (eg. compare a tulip with an apple tree or pine) no (only tall tulips) does not equal (only tall plants.) It is…

• Member
138 karma

There are always exceptions, but, in general, no. How would restating the premise actually help the argument? We are already to assume that every premise in the stimulus is true, so restating it won't bridge any existing logic gaps. It's essentially useless. Strengthen AC's should confirm a necessary assumption, but if it's already stated then you don't need to "assume" it at all.
There is a difference between restating a premise and an AC that validates a premise. I think this is used by the LSAT in curve-breaker level questions. For example, an AC that shows that a premise is relevant to the conclusion might look like its restating it from a cursory glance and is a little easier to overlook. I don't think it's ever a good idea to make hard rules for how you approach LSAT questions, unless it's a logical fact.
Hope this helps!

• Member
245 karma

@mattscrappy This helps A LOT! Thanks! The difference between restating a premise and validating a premise just clicked, thank you soo much for putting it this way! At the moment I miss 1-3 on LR and it's usually these curve-breaker level questions with minute language discrepancies in the ACs that are getting to me. This changes it