Weaken, Strengthen, Evaluate Strategies

Weaken Strategy

  1. Identify Premises and Main Conclusion
       - Determine the underlying premises that support the conclusion of the argument.

  2. Spot the Gap
    - Identify a potential additional fact that could decrease the likelihood of the conclusion.

  3. Pre-phrase
       - Maintain an open mind while considering: What additional fact could undermine the conclusion's likelihood?

  4. Evaluate Answer Choices (AC's)
       - Assuming the AC to be true, assess whether it diminishes the relevance of the premises and makes the conclusion less likely.

Goal (Weakening): Make the conclusion less likely to be true.

  • Decrease the support the premises lend to the conclusion: Decrease the relevance of the support by introducing relevant and damaging information or offering an alternative explanation.

  • Goal: Decrease the support lent to the conclusion based on the premises.

Strengthen Strategy

  1. Identify Premises and Main Conclusion

    - Determine the underlying premises that support the conclusion of the argument.

  2. Spot the Gap
       - Identify potential additional premises that could increase the likelihood of the conclusion.

  3. Evaluate AC's
       - Assuming the AC to be true, does this make the conclusion more likely?

Goal (Strengthening): Make the conclusion more likely to be true.

  • Increase the support the premises lend to the conclusion: Increase the relevance of the existing premises by introducing relevant information that adds support, or weakening an alternate explanation.

  • Goal: Increase the support lent to the conclusion based on the premises.

General Strengthening/Weakening Principles

  • Evaluate Relevant Factors
       - Assess the relevance of an answer choice in relation to the main conclusion.

  • Analyze Premises for Reasoning Patterns
       - Focus primarily on the method of reasoning and the relationship between the premises and conclusion.

  • Introduce New Information as AC's
       - The correct answer choice will engage with the argument; introduce new information to actively increase/decrease the conclusion’s likelihood.

  • Correct Answer Choices (CAC)
       - A correct answer choice is both relevant and explicitly engages with the argument’s reasoning and relies on the fewest assumptions.

Always engage with the arguments, support structure, and reasoning.

Assumptions in Arguments

  1. Overview of Assumptions

Evaluate the extent of support the premises provide to the main conclusion; any gaps in the reasoning are assumptions.

  • Assumptions within the stimulus are opportunities to both weaken or strengthen the argument.

  • Identify assumptions embedded within the support structure of the argument.

  • Correct answer choices address assumptions within an argument, either explicitly or implicitly.
     Identify assumptions when the conclusion IS NOT a hypothesis, prediction, or prescription.
       

Methods of Reasoning

  1. Cost-Benefit Analysis
    Assumption: The stimulus presumes that the stated costs/benefits presented in the premises are not outweighed by any unmentioned costs/benefits.
         - Strengthening (S): Compare unmentioned costs/benefits to enhance the overall strength of the argument, thereby making the conclusion more likely.
         - Weakening (W): Introduce an unmentioned cost/benefit that diminishes the likelihood of the conclusion and weakens the premises' support.

  2. Analogy
    Assumption: The stimulus assumes that the concepts are relevantly similar and that they lend support to the conclusion.
         - Strengthening (S): Present a relevant similarity that reinforces the analogy, rendering it more supportive of the conclusion.
         - Weakening (W): Introduce significant differences that invalidate the supportive nature of the premises.

  3. Rule-Application
    Assumption: The stimulus assumes that a certain principle applies to the current scenario.
         - Strengthening (S): Bolster the relevance of the application to the established rule, enhancing the overall argument support.
         - Weakening (W): Present information that challenges the applicability of the rule, thus undermining the argument's strength.

Causal Argument Forms

  1. Phenomena-Hypothesis

Structure:

1.) Premises: Phenomena

    Conclusion: Hypothesis (x)

2.) Premises: Phenomena

    Conclusion: Not Hypothesis (y), but Hypothesis (x)
Causal and Experimental Reasoning:
   The stimulus assumes a causal impact or explination form the premises.

  1. Correlative Phenomena (Causal Hypothesis)
    Structure:
         - Premise: Identified a correlation between phenomenon X and phenomenon Y
         - Conclusion: Hypothesis suggesting causation (X → causes →Y).
      Evaluating Causal Arguments

  • Evaluate causal relationships by using alternative explanations:

  • Causal Logic: Evaluate causal arguments by using causal mechanisms, chronology, direct evidence, predictions, or linking causal claims.

    • Determine any assumption gaps, the premises' relevance, and the support the premises lend to the conclusion.
           Alternate Explainations
             1. X → Y
             2. Y → X
             3. Additional variable causes both X and Y
             4. Coincidence
           - Strengthening (S): Eliminate alternative hypotheses, reinforcing the relevance of the premises that support the conclusion.
           - Weakening (W): Introduce alternative hypotheses plus new information that renders the premises less relevant.
         

  1. Experimental Arguments
    Structure:
         - Premise: Design of the experiment is presented.
         - Conclusion: A hypothesis is proposed based on the findings.
    Evaluating Experimental Design:
         - Evaluate assumption gaps or flaws in the experimental design by analyzing the experiments’ conditions: Evaluate the observation methods, Self-selection criteria, Sample size and representativeness, and the Presence of a control group (placebo effect).
         - Strengthening (S): Affirm established experimental conditions, further bolstering the relevance and support of the premises.
         - Weakening (W): Introduce a relevant challenge to the experimental design that diminishes the support provided by existing premises.