Read the Stem

Step 1: what does the question stem tell me?

(1) Whether I'm supposed to be critical of the reasoning (subjective) or not (objective). (2) What to expect in the argument, and in the right and wrong answers. [p.237]

Do the test writers keep changing the question stems?

No. There are only a few phrasings per type, used exam after exam. If I know the stems I know the type. [p.237]

The prosecutor's reasoning is most vulnerable to criticism because it overlooks which one of the following possibilities?

IDENTIFY THE FLAW ▸ I'm SUBJECTIVE (critical: I judge the argument) ▸ Apply answers → stimulus ▸ Job: Find the gap between support and conclusion BEFORE the answers. Name the flaw. Pick the answer that names it.

Which one of the following most accurately describes an error in the argument's reasoning?

IDENTIFY THE FLAW ▸ I'm SUBJECTIVE (critical: I judge the argument) ▸ Apply answers → stimulus ▸ Job: Find the gap between support and conclusion BEFORE the answers. Name the flaw. Pick the answer that names it.

The reasoning in the argument is questionable because the argument

IDENTIFY THE FLAW ▸ I'm SUBJECTIVE (critical: I judge the argument) ▸ Apply answers → stimulus ▸ Job: Find the gap between support and conclusion BEFORE the answers. Name the flaw. Pick the answer that names it.

The argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it

IDENTIFY THE FLAW ▸ I'm SUBJECTIVE (critical: I judge the argument) ▸ Apply answers → stimulus ▸ Job: Find the gap between support and conclusion BEFORE the answers. Name the flaw. Pick the answer that names it.

The prosecutor assumes that

BASIC ASSUMPTION ▸ I'm SUBJECTIVE (critical: I judge the argument) ▸ Apply answers → stimulus ▸ Job: It's a flaw in disguise. Find the flaw, then pick the unstated belief that fills it.

The author assumes that

BASIC ASSUMPTION ▸ I'm SUBJECTIVE (critical: I judge the argument) ▸ Apply answers → stimulus ▸ Job: It's a flaw in disguise. Find the flaw, then pick the unstated belief that fills it.

What does the argument assume?

BASIC ASSUMPTION ▸ I'm SUBJECTIVE (critical: I judge the argument) ▸ Apply answers → stimulus ▸ Job: It's a flaw in disguise. Find the flaw, then pick the unstated belief that fills it.

The conclusion follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?

SUFFICIENT ASSUMPTION ▸ I'm SUBJECTIVE (critical: I judge the argument) ▸ Apply answers → stimulus ▸ Job: FILL THE HOLE 100% (often a conditional link). More-than-enough is fine.

Which one of the following, if assumed, allows the conclusion to be properly drawn?

SUFFICIENT ASSUMPTION ▸ I'm SUBJECTIVE (critical: I judge the argument) ▸ Apply answers → stimulus ▸ Job: FILL THE HOLE 100% (often a conditional link). More-than-enough is fine.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?

REQUIRED ASSUMPTION ▸ I'm SUBJECTIVE (critical: I judge the argument) ▸ Apply answers → stimulus ▸ Job: Find what MUST be true. Confirm with the negation test (negate it: does the argument die?).

The argument relies on which one of the following assumptions?

REQUIRED ASSUMPTION ▸ I'm SUBJECTIVE (critical: I judge the argument) ▸ Apply answers → stimulus ▸ Job: Find what MUST be true. Confirm with the negation test (negate it: does the argument die?).

Which principle, if valid, most helps to justify the argument's reasoning?

SUPPORTING PRINCIPLE ▸ I'm SUBJECTIVE (critical: I judge the argument) ▸ Apply answers → stimulus ▸ Job: Find the gap, then plug it with a general rule that covers this exact case.

The argument's reasoning most closely conforms to which one of the following principles?

SUPPORTING PRINCIPLE ▸ I'm SUBJECTIVE (critical: I judge the argument) ▸ Apply answers → stimulus ▸ Job: Find the gap, then plug it with a general rule that covers this exact case.

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

STRENGTHEN ▸ I'm SUBJECTIVE (critical: I judge the argument) ▸ Apply answers → stimulus ▸ Job: Find the flaw. Pick the answer that tightens the support → conclusion bond. Any amount counts.

Which one of the following, if true, provides the most support for the argument?

STRENGTHEN ▸ I'm SUBJECTIVE (critical: I judge the argument) ▸ Apply answers → stimulus ▸ Job: Find the flaw. Pick the answer that tightens the support → conclusion bond. Any amount counts.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

WEAKEN ▸ I'm SUBJECTIVE (critical: I judge the argument) ▸ Apply answers → stimulus ▸ Job: Hit the support → conclusion bond. Watch for opposite-role traps.

Which one of the following, if true, most calls into question the conclusion?

WEAKEN ▸ I'm SUBJECTIVE (critical: I judge the argument) ▸ Apply answers → stimulus ▸ Job: Hit the support → conclusion bond. Watch for opposite-role traps.

Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion of the argument?

IDENTIFY THE CONCLUSION ▸ I'm OBJECTIVE (not critical: I describe, no judging) ▸ Apply answers → stimulus ▸ Job: Find the main point. Don't judge it. Watch for intermediate conclusions and opposing views.

Which one of the following is the overall conclusion drawn in the argument?

IDENTIFY THE CONCLUSION ▸ I'm OBJECTIVE (not critical: I describe, no judging) ▸ Apply answers → stimulus ▸ Job: Find the main point. Don't judge it. Watch for intermediate conclusions and opposing views.

The claim that [X] plays which one of the following roles in the argument?

FIND THE ROLE ▸ I'm OBJECTIVE (not critical: I describe, no judging) ▸ Apply answers → stimulus ▸ Job: Find the point and the support first. Then name what the cited part DOES. Never read it in a vacuum.

The reference to [X] figures in the argument in which one of the following ways?

FIND THE ROLE ▸ I'm OBJECTIVE (not critical: I describe, no judging) ▸ Apply answers → stimulus ▸ Job: Find the point and the support first. Then name what the cited part DOES. Never read it in a vacuum.

The argument proceeds by which one of the following?

METHOD OF REASONING ▸ I'm OBJECTIVE (not critical: I describe, no judging) ▸ Apply answers → stimulus ▸ Job: Describe the structure: 'Author says X, the reason is Y.' Not whether it's good.

Which one of the following most accurately describes the argument's method of reasoning?

METHOD OF REASONING ▸ I'm OBJECTIVE (not critical: I describe, no judging) ▸ Apply answers → stimulus ▸ Job: Describe the structure: 'Author says X, the reason is Y.' Not whether it's good.

The flawed reasoning above is most similar to that in which one of the following?

MATCH THE FLAW ▸ I'm SUBJECTIVE (critical: I judge the argument) ▸ Apply both ways (extra time) ▸ Job: Name the flaw, then match flaw/structure only. Ignore the topic.

Which one of the following contains flawed reasoning most similar to that in the argument above?

MATCH THE FLAW ▸ I'm SUBJECTIVE (critical: I judge the argument) ▸ Apply both ways (extra time) ▸ Job: Name the flaw, then match flaw/structure only. Ignore the topic.

The pattern of reasoning above is most similar to that in which one of the following?

MATCH THE REASONING ▸ I'm OBJECTIVE (not critical: I describe, no judging) ▸ Apply both ways (extra time) ▸ Job: Mirror the structure: conclusion type + support → conclusion link. Ignore the topic.

Which one of the following arguments is most similar in its reasoning to the argument above?

MATCH THE REASONING ▸ I'm OBJECTIVE (not critical: I describe, no judging) ▸ Apply both ways (extra time) ▸ Job: Mirror the structure: conclusion type + support → conclusion link. Ignore the topic.

If the statements above are true, which one of the following must also be true?

INFERENCE ▸ I'm OBJECTIVE (not critical: I describe, no judging) ▸ Apply stimulus → answers ▸ Job: No argument to find. Pick the MOST PROVABLE answer. Kill the 4 that can't be proven. Smallest leap wins.

Which one of the following is most strongly supported by the information above?

INFERENCE ▸ I'm OBJECTIVE (not critical: I describe, no judging) ▸ Apply stimulus → answers ▸ Job: No argument to find. Pick the MOST PROVABLE answer. Kill the 4 that can't be proven. Smallest leap wins.

Which one of the following most logically completes the argument?

INFERENCE ▸ I'm OBJECTIVE (not critical: I describe, no judging) ▸ Apply stimulus → answers ▸ Job: No argument to find. Pick the MOST PROVABLE answer. Kill the 4 that can't be proven. Smallest leap wins.

Which one of the following best illustrates the principle stated above?

GIVE AN EXAMPLE ▸ I'm OBJECTIVE (not critical: I describe, no judging) ▸ Apply stimulus → answers ▸ Job: Understand the principle precisely. Pick the case that is an example of it. Extra time. Don't over-tighten.

Which one of the following most closely conforms to the principle that the passage illustrates?

GIVE AN EXAMPLE ▸ I'm OBJECTIVE (not critical: I describe, no judging) ▸ Apply stimulus → answers ▸ Job: Understand the principle precisely. Pick the case that is an example of it. Extra time. Don't over-tighten.

[Speaker A] and [Speaker B] disagree over whether

IDENTIFY THE DISAGREEMENT ▸ I'm OBJECTIVE (not critical: I describe, no judging) ▸ Apply answers → stimulus ▸ Job: Find the ONE issue both speakers address AND oppose on. Usually NOT the first speaker's main point.

Their statements provide the most support for holding that A and B disagree about whether

IDENTIFY THE DISAGREEMENT ▸ I'm OBJECTIVE (not critical: I describe, no judging) ▸ Apply answers → stimulus ▸ Job: Find the ONE issue both speakers address AND oppose on. Usually NOT the first speaker's main point.

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy above?

EXPLAIN THE DISCREPANCY ▸ I'm OBJECTIVE (not critical: I describe, no judging) ▸ Apply answers → stimulus ▸ Job: De-program from arguments. Frame it as 'How come…?' Pick a possible explanation. (EXCEPT version = pick the non-explainer.)

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to explain why

EXPLAIN THE DISCREPANCY ▸ I'm OBJECTIVE (not critical: I describe, no judging) ▸ Apply answers → stimulus ▸ Job: De-program from arguments. Frame it as 'How come…?' Pick a possible explanation. (EXCEPT version = pick the non-explainer.)