Logical Reasoning Question Types PDF

Logical Reasoning - Question Types Main Conclusion Argument 1. Identify the Main Conclusion 2. Identify the Premise(s) 3. Intuitively understand how the Premise(s) support the Main Conclusion Answer Choices 1. Evaluate whether the answer choice is factually supported. If it’s not, eliminate i...

Logical Reasoning - Question Types Main Conclusion Argument 1. Identify the Main Conclusion 2. Identify the Premise(s) 3. Intuitively understand how the Premise(s) support the Main Conclusion Answer Choices 1. Evaluate whether the answer choice is factually supported. If it’s not, eliminate it. 2. If it is, evaluate whether the answer choice is the main conclusion Role of Statement Argument 1. Identify the Main Conclusion 2. Identify the Premise(s) 3. Intuitively understand how the Premise(s) support the Main Conclusion 4. Predict what role/function the statement serves in the argument (is it conclusion, premise, background info, example, analogy, explanation/alternative explanation, what the argument is refuting? etc.) Answer Choices 1. Evaluate whether the answer choice accurately describes what the statement is doing in the argument. Method of Reasoning Argument 1. Identify the Main Conclusion 2. Identify the Premise(s) 3. Intuitively understand how the Premise(s) support the Main Conclusion Answer Choices 1. Evaluate whether the answer choice accurately describes what the argument is doing. Flaw Argument 1. Identify the Main Conclusion 2. Identify the Premise(s) 3. Intuitively understand how the Premise(s) support the Main Conclusion 4. Predict the flaw (why are the premises horrible reasons for the conclusion, or why is the conclusion a horrible one in light of the premises?) Answer Choices 1. Evaluate whether the answer choice accurately describes what the argument is doing. If it is not, eliminate it. 2. If it is, evaluate whether it is a fair criticism of the argument. For answer choices that say, “the argument fails to mention/ignore the possibility/does not take into account that…”, it’s likely that it is descriptively true – it does not mention it In this case, to evaluate whether it’s a fair criticism, ask yourself, “Does the argument HAVE TO mention this fact for it to be a good argument? Is this thing they aren’t mentioning IMPORTANT to the argument?” If it is not, then it is not a fair criticism. Strengthen Argument 1. Identify the Main Conclusion 2. Identify the Premise(s) 3. Intuitively understand how the Premise(s) support the Main Conclusion Answer Choices 1. Evaluate if the answer choice is true, whether it helps the conclusion. The right strengthener will either: 1) Make the conclusion directly more persuasively, or 2) Make one of the premise(s) a more persuasive reason for the conclusion Weaken Argument 1. Identify the Main Conclusion 2. Identify the Premise(s) 3. Intuitively understand how the Premise(s) support the Main Conclusion Answer Choices 1. Evaluate if the answer choice is true, whether it hurts the conclusion. The right weakener will either: 1) Make the conclusion directly less persuasively, or 2) Make one of the premise(s) a less persuasive reason for the conclusion Necessary Assumption Argument 1. Identify the Main Conclusion 2. Identify the Premise(s) 3. Intuitively understand how the Premise(s) support the Main Conclusion Answer Choices 1. Evaluate if the answer choice must be true for the argument to work. The right answer choice, when negated, will destroy the argument either by: 1) Destroying the premise’s ability to support the conclusion, or 2) Destroy the conclusion directly Sufficient Assumption Argument 1. Identify the Main Conclusion 2. Identify the Premise(s) 3. Intuitively understand how the Premise(s) support the Main Conclusion. 4. See if you can predict an answer that, when combined with a premise, would GUARANTEE the conclusion. If not, that’s okay (most right answers cannot be predicted) Answer Choices 1. Evaluate if the answer choice is true, whether it GUARANTEES the conclusion. The right answer will either: 1) Directly GUARANTEE the conclusion, or 2) Work with a premise to GUARANTEE the conclusion (most common) Principle Justify (pseudo-Sufficient Assumption) Argument/Decision/Value Judgement 1. Identify the Main Conclusion/Decision/Value Judgement 2. Identify the Premise(s) 3. Intuitively understand how the Premise(s) support the Main Conclusion/Decision/Value Judgement 4. See if you can predict an answer that, when combined with a premise, would GUARANTEE the conclusion. If not, that’s okay (most right answers cannot be predicted) Answer Choices 1. Evaluate if the answer choice is true, whether it GUARANTEES the conclusion. The right answer will either: 1) Directly GUARANTEE the conclusion, or 2) Work with a premise to GUARANTEE the conclusion (most common) 2. If there is an exception stated in the principle of the answer choice, evaluate whether the exception is applicable to the argument/situation of the passage. If the exception is applicable, then the principle is dead (it cannot support the conclusion). If it is not applicable, then the principle is alive (it can support the conclusion). Principle Apply 1. Identify the Principle(s) in the passage 2. Identify the Exception(s) to the Principle(s) if applicable (“unless/without/except”, “in the absence of”, etc.) Answer Choices 1. Evaluate whether the situation in the answer choice accurately follows/applies the principle in the passage (pay close attention whether the exception clauses are applicable). Must be True Passage 1. Understand the meaning of each sentence, as precisely as possible 2. See if you can make any Inference(s) (usually logical combination between two sentences). If not, that’s okay (most right answers cannot be predicted) Answer Choices 1. Evaluate whether the answer choice is factually GUARANTEED to be true 2. The wrong answer choices will not be factually supported at all Most Strongly Supported Passage 1. Understand the meaning of each sentence, as PRECISELY as possible Answer Choices 1. Evaluate whether the answer choice is factually REASONABLE to be true 2. The wrong answer choices will not be factually supported at all Paradox Step 1: Identify, as PRECISELY as possible, what needs to be EXPLAINED Step 2: Find an answer choice that explains what NEEDS to be explained Wrong Answer Choices 1. Make the situation even more unexplained/paradoxical/irreconcilable/discrepant 2. Does not explain anything 3. Explains what already has been explained in the passage Point-at-issue Passage 1. Understand, as PRECISELY as possible, the viewpoints of each author 2. Re-read the statements of the SECOND author and evaluate whether the first author disagrees with each Answer Choices 1. Evaluate whether Author A agrees or disagrees with the statement in the answer choice, or neither. 2. Evaluate whether Author B agrees or disagrees with the statement in the same answer choice 3. The right answer choice will be one where one of the authors agrees with it, and the other disagrees 4. If one of the authors, or both authors, have no opinion on the statement in the answer choice, it cannot be correct (how can two people disagree on something one/both of them have no opinion on?) Parallel Reasoning Argument 1. Identify the Main Conclusion 2. Identify the Premise(s) 3. Intuitively understand how the Premise(s) support the Main Conclusion 4. Identify, as much as possible, structural features of the Argument (use of example, analogy, alternative explanation, necessary/sufficient conditions, etc.) 5. If the Argument heavily relies on Conditional Logic, it may be helpful to draw the conditional relationships out. Answer Choices 1. Find an answer choice the argument of which shares the structural features of the original argument. 2. Pay close attention to how the conclusion is structured/worded. Many wrong answer choices can be quickly eliminated since their conclusion doesn’t “match” with the conclusion of the original argument 3. If the Argument heavily relies on Conditional Logic, it may be helpful to draw the conditional relationships out. Parallel Flaw Argument 1. Identify the Main Conclusion 2. Identify the Premise(s) 3. Intuitively understand how the Premise(s) support the Main Conclusion 4. Predict the flaw (why are the premises horrible reasons for the conclusion, or why is the conclusion a horrible one in light of the premises?) 5. If the Argument heavily relies on Conditional Logic, it may be helpful to draw the conditional relationships out. Answer Choices 1. Find an answer choice the argument of which shares the same flaw as the original argument. 2. Pay close attention to how the conclusion is structured/worded. Many wrong answer choices can be quickly eliminated since their conclusion doesn’t “match” with the conclusion of the original argument 3. If the Argument heavily relies on Conditional Logic, it may be helpful to draw the conditional relationships out.