Logical Reasoning Ch 3

What are Power Players in an argument?

Power Players are the most important words in an argument: MUST, CANNOT, COULD, NOT NECESSARILY, and their synonyms.

What are Certainty Power Players, and why are they strong?

Certainty Power Players are MUST and CANNOT. They are strong because they guarantee something with no room for doubt.

What are examples of MUST Power Player synonyms?

Always, every single time, no exceptions ever, you can’t get out of doing this no matter what.

What are examples of CANNOT Power Player synonyms?

Never, impossible in any circumstances, no way.

What are Possibility Power Players, and why are they weak?

Possibility Power Players are COULD and NOT NECESSARILY. They are weak because they only suggest something might be true, not guaranteeing anything.

What are examples of COULD Power Player synonyms?

Possible, can, there’s a chance, maybe, might, encompasses both something unlikely and something likely, may or may not.

What are examples of NOT NECESSARILY Power Player synonyms?

Doesn’t have to be the case, could be an exception, not guaranteed, literally “not must.”

Why are Power Players important in arguments?

Power Players determine how hard it is to prove conclusions. You only attack or prove the conclusion, not premises. The question stem determines whether to prove or attack, not the strength of Power Players.

What is the author’s role with premises and conclusions?

The author proves the premises. You believe the premises and prove or attack the conclusion based on the question stem. The author makes the argument easy or hard to prove based on premises.

How does proving strong vs. weak premises differ for the author?

Strong premises (MUST, CANNOT) are hard to prove, needing strong factual backing as they claim always or never true. Weak premises (COULD, SOMETIMES) are easy to prove, needing only one example.

When is it easy or hard for you to prove a conclusion?

Easy to prove if premises connect smoothly to the conclusion without big gaps. Hard to prove when there’s a big logical leap or weak support between premises and conclusion.

When is it easy or hard to attack conclusions?

Easy to attack strong conclusions (MUST, CANNOT) with a small possibility or counterexample. Hard to attack weak conclusions (COULD, MIGHT) because they only claim something might happen, which is difficult to disprove.

What is “burden of proof”?

Huge burden of proof means that the author or you, depending on the question must provide very strong, airtight evidence to back up that kind of conclusion.

Why are MUST conclusions tough to prove and easy to attack?

MUST conclusions have a huge burden of proof, needing powerful premises to back them up. They are easy to attack because even a small possibility or counterexample can break them.

Why are CANNOT conclusions difficult to prove and easy to attack?

CANNOT conclusions have a massive burden of proof, needing powerful premises. They are easy to attack because a small possibility or counterexample can break them.

Why are COULD conclusions easy to prove and hard to attack?

COULD conclusions only need premises that allow the possibility, making them easy to prove. They are hard to attack because their weak, flexible claims are difficult to disprove.

Why are NOT NECESSARILY conclusions easy to prove and hard to attack?

NOT NECESSARILY conclusions are easy to prove as they only require showing the author didn’t prove a MUST claim. They are hard to attack because strong loopholes are needed to invalidate their weak claims.

How do Power Players affect an argument’s success?

Arguments succeed or fail based on how certain the conclusion must be true. Changing one Power Player word can make the conclusion much easier or harder to prove, as they carry significant influence.

How do Content and Power Players differ in arguments?

Content is the replaceable specifics or story of the stimulus, making up most of the argument’s word count. Power Players (MUST, CANNOT, COULD, NOT NECESSARILY) make the argument strong or weak and are key to spotting reasoning errors.

Why focus on Power Players instead of content?

Focusing only on content risks missing major reasoning errors. Arguments differ meaningfully by Power Players, not content. Destroying an argument requires focusing on Power Players, not interchangeable content.

Why are MUST and CANNOT considered Certainty Power Players?

MUST and CANNOT are the strongest and most straightforward Power Players, making definite claims with no room for doubt, providing a solid foundation for arguments.

How does English imply certainty without explicit Power Players?

Sentences without doubt-indicating words imply certainty are treated as certain unless specified otherwise.

What does MUST mean on the LSAT?

MUST means 100% certain, with no exceptions. The author claims something is completely true as described. If there’s a small reason it might not be true, the argument is weak.

What does CANNOT mean on the LSAT?

CANNOT means 0% possible, totally impossible. It doesn’t mean “probably not” or “unlikely.” If there’s a small chance, the stimulus uses COULD or another word.

Do Could and Not Necessarily overlap?

Could and Not Necessarily often overlap, which can cause some confusion. If a statement says something ‘could’ happen, there is also a chance it might not happen. It means it might happen, but it isn’t required to happen.

How do Possibility Power Players differ from Certainty Power Players?

Possibility Power Players (COULD, NOT NECESSARILY) cover a range of likelihoods, not a fixed level, unlike Certainty Power Players (MUST, CANNOT), which are absolute.

What range of probability does COULD cover?

COULD covers 1% to 100% probability, everything except 0%. It means something is not impossible, even if there’s just a small chance.

What range of probability does NOT NECESSARILY cover?

NOT NECESSARILY covers 0% to 99% probability, everything except 100% certainty. It means something might or might not be true.

What are the characteristics of COULD statements?

COULD is easier to prove than MUST, only requiring it’s not impossible. Any language denoting possibility is a COULD statement. It can be replaced with “not impossible.”

What are the characteristics of NOT NECESSARILY statements?

NOT NECESSARILY means “not must,” including every possibility except 100% certainty. It’s a weak claim, easy to prove, often used to challenge MUST claims by showing they aren’t proven.

How is NOT NECESSARILY often used in stimuli?

NOT NECESSARILY appears in stimuli starting with “some scientists,” “some critics,” or “some people believe,” where the author disagrees, pushing back without a strong claim by saying it’s not necessarily true.

How do Power Players relate to argument parts?

Certainty Premises (MUST, CANNOT) have strong evidence. Certainty Conclusions (MUST, CANNOT) are hard to prove. Possibility Premises (COULD, NOT NECESSARILY) have weak evidence. Possibility Conclusions (COULD, NOT NECESSARILY) are easy to prove.

What is the author’s goal when making an argument?

The author must prove the conclusion is definitely true with 100% certainty, whether it’s a Certainty or Possibility Conclusion. For COULD conclusions, they prove it’s at least possible with 100% certainty.

What happens with Certainty Premises and Certainty Conclusions?

Certainty Premises + Certainty Conclusions are hard to prove and easy to attack. Certainty Conclusions almost always require Certainty Premises to be valid.

What happens with Possibility Premises and Possibility Conclusions?

Possibility Premises + Possibility Conclusions are easy to prove and hard to attack.

What happens with Certainty Premises and Possibility Conclusions?

Certainty Premises + Possibility Conclusions are easy to prove and hard to attack.

What happens with Possibility Premises and Certainty Conclusions?

Possibility Premises + Certainty Conclusions are hard to prove and easy to attack. Valid Certainty Conclusions from Possibility Premises are rare, typically requiring mixed premises.

How do Certainty Premises support MUST Conclusions?

Certainty Premises are powerful but rarely organized well enough on the LSAT to support a valid MUST Conclusion. Look for gaps between premises, which create Loopholes, making the argument vulnerable.

What are Loopholes in relation to arguments?

Loopholes are exceptions that challenge what the argument tries to prove without contradicting premises. They are reasonable scenarios a normal person would consider possible, often matching correct answers in LR questions.

How do you create Loopholes for an argument?

Assume the stimulus omits important information. Question the connection between premises, not their truth. Think of any reasonable scenario that fits common sense and doesn’t contradict premises.

How do Loopholes apply to CANNOT Conclusions?

The same Loopholes for MUST Conclusions apply to CANNOT Conclusions because both are Certainty Conclusions, switchable by wording. Their strong claims make them vulnerable to Loopholes if something is missing.

Can Possibility Premises prove Certainty Conclusions?

You can’t prove a Certainty Conclusion from all Possibility Premises, except in rare, simple cases. Typically, Possibility Premises are mixed with Certainty Premises, as LSAT arguments are rarely simple enough.

Why is it easy to prove Possibility Conclusions from Certainty Premises?

Certainty Premises provide strong evidence, making it easy to prove a Possibility Conclusion, which only requires showing something is possible.

Why are COULD Conclusions hard to disprove?

COULD Conclusions are hard to disprove because they only claim something is possible. A Loophole challenging a COULD Conclusion must be strong and convincing.

Why are NOT NECESSARILY Conclusions easy to prove?

NOT NECESSARILY Conclusions are easy to prove because you only need to show the author didn’t prove a MUST claim.

Can Possibility Premises prove Possibility Conclusions?

Possibility Premises can hypothetically prove Possibility Conclusions, but these arguments are almost always invalid. Valid conclusions are hard to achieve with only Possibility Premises.

How do Power Players relate to truth and falsity?

Truth and falsity are indicators tied to Power Players. The LSAT focuses on different levels of things being true or false. Words like true and false are critical and can determine whether you get a question right.

What are the truth and false categories to learn for the LSAT?

MUST BE TRUE, MUST BE FALSE, COULD BE TRUE, COULD BE FALSE, CANNOT BE TRUE, CANNOT BE FALSE, NOT NECESSARILY TRUE, NOT NECESSARILY FALSE.

What is Equivalence in relation to Power Players?

Equivalence tells us which pairs of Power Players mean the same thing.

What is Negation in relation to Power Players?

Negation means adding or removing “not” from Power Players. The correct answer to an Except question is the Negation of the Power Player in the question stem.

How does Negation differ from Opposite in Power Players?

Negation denies a statement’s truth (e.g., “I’m not hungry” for “I’m hungry”), showing it’s not always true, not proving it false. Opposite replaces the meaning with an extreme contrast (e.g., “I hate chocolate” for “I love chocolate”). Negation is gentler than Opposite.