LOGICAL DEFINITION STRATEGY AND PRACTICE KEYWORD EXAMPLE/

REASONING CONCLUSION, EVIDENCE, AND ASSUMPTION PREDICTION

Assumption Family of Questions: Assumption, Weaken, Strengthen, and Flaw

ASSUMPTION Asks for the assumption the author Identify: Look for keywords to identify question type Assumption Allyson plays volleyball
makes to go from the evidence to the Untangle: Identify conclusion, and evidence Added for Central High School.
conclusion Predict: Bridge the gap from evidence to the Depends on Therefore, Allyson must
conclusion. Presupposes be more than six feet tall.
Assumption must bring two terms Evidence + assumption = conclusion
together (Conclusion, and Evidence) Evaluate: Compare your prediction to the multiple
choice answers
An assumption is an unstated piece of
evidence that is required for the
conclusion to be valid
WEAKEN Information that can be added Identify: Look for keywords to identify question type Weakens Allyson plays volleyball
to the argument to make the conclusion Untangle: Identify conclusion, and evidence Calls into question for Central High School.
less likely. Do not need to disprove, only Predict: Bridge the gap from evidence to the Casts doubt on Therefore, Allyson must
less plausible. conclusion Seriously damages be more than six feet tall.
Evidence + assumption = conclusion Which of the following, if
Prove conclusion less likely to happen true, would most weaken
Evaluate: Compare your prediction to the multiple the argument?
choice answers

STRENGTHEN Information that can be added to the Identify: Look for keywords to identify question type Strengthen Allyson plays volleyball
argument to make it more likely. Do not Untangle: Identify conclusion, and evidence Support for Central High School.
need to make it true just more plausible Predict: Bridge the gap from evidence to the Provides Therefore, Allyson must
conclusion be more than six feet tall.
Evidence + assumption = conclusion Which of the following, if
Bolster the assumption, support the conclusion, or true, most supports the
eliminate alternative possibilities statement above?
Evaluate: Compare your prediction to the multiple
choice answers

FLAW Determine the error the author makes in Identify: Look for keywords to identify question type Error in reasoning All players on the Central
going from the evidence to the Untangle: Identify conclusion, and evidence Questionable High School volleyball
conclusion Predict: Bridge the gap from evidence to the because team are over six feet
conclusion tall. Therefore, all high
Flaw: ask you to identify a flaw in the Evidence + assumption = conclusion Flawed school volleyball players
reasoning of the stimulus Question the conclusion? Misleading are more than six feet
  Unwarranted assumption tall. The argument is
 Necessity versus sufficiency Vulnerable to flawed because?
 Representativeness criticism
 Scope Shift
 Alternative possibilities
 Causation versus correlation
 Opinion versus fact
 Number versus percentage
Evaluate: Compare your prediction to the multiple
choice answers

INFERENCE Inference: Select the answer that can be  The correct answer to an inference question will Inferred Allyson plays volleyball
inferred by the stimulus. The answer not require any information beyond the stimulus for Central High School,
must be true based on the information  Simple summary of the stimulus Support (direction despite the team’s rule
provided.  The correct answer cannot be more extreme of support) against participation by
than the stimulus. Words such as never, always nonstudents. Which one
Must Be True: ask for a statement that is and some should be noted so that you can Must be true of the following must be
match the scope to the answer Logically follows true on the statement
conclusively proven by the stimulus
 The correct inference need not come from the Properly inferred above?
Most Strongly Supported: ask for a entire stimulus. It may just be a rephrasing of
statement that is supported by the one sentence or a combination of sentences Most strongly
stimulus supported

Complete the Passage: ask you to choose Must also be true

the statement which best completes the
passage

Cannot Be True: ask for a statement that

is incompatible with the stimulus
PRINCIPLE Ask you to find general rule that accounts Identify: Look for keywords to identify question type Principle Marvin’s grandmother
for the author’s position. More Untangle: Identify conclusion, and evidence. Policy fell and broke her leg
specifically, you may be given a general Sum up the argument and put it into general terms Proposition while walking through
rule and asked to identify a situation and that could be applied to other arguments the parking lot.
asked to fit it into a global generality. Or Predict: Look for summary of the argument in broad Therefore, Marvin should
it could be the reverse---you may be terms. General nature. provide a home for his
given a general rule and asked to identify Evaluate: Compare your prediction to the multiple grand-mother while she is
a choice answers recuperating. The
author’s position most
 closely conforms to which
Identify: ask you to extract a general rule one of the following
from the stimulus principles?
Apply: ask you to apply a general rule
provided by the stimulus

PARALLEL Identify the choice that contains the Identify: Look for keywords to identify question type Parallel Coach Walker has her
REASONING same kind of reasoning as that presented Untangle: Identify conclusion, and evidence. best recruiting class this
in the stimulus. The correct answer is Characterize the conclusion type Similar to year along with several
based on the form of the argument not  Prediction supported by unquantifiable experienced players. They
its content evidence Pattern of work well as a team, they
 Recommendation reasoning are dedicated, and they
 Comparison are motivated to win the
Valid: ask for the answer choice that
 Assertion of fact Most similar conference championship
matches the reasoning of the stimulus
this year.
 If/then
Flaw: ask for the answer choice which  Value judgment
Which one of the
matches a flaw in the stimulus  Is the conclusion positive/negative? Likely or
following arguments has
impossible. a pattern of reasoning
Predict: you are looking for an answer with a most like the one in the
conclusion that is in the form of a positive prediction argument above?
supported by qualitative evidence
Evaluate: Match the correct answer to the argument
structure.
 Find the conclusion of the answer to
determine if it is a positive prediction
 If not, eliminate it. if you have more than
one answer left after checking the
conclusions, go back to those and compare
the evidence structure.
 Focus on the form of the argument, not its
content. A stimulus about music may have
an answer choice that involves music may
have an answer choice that involves music,
but that doesn’t mean that the reasoning in
the argument is similar.

METHOD OF Demonstrate an understanding of how Identify: Look for keywords to identify question type Argumentative Company president: the
ARGUMENT an author’s argument is put together, not Untangle: Identify conclusion, and evidence. technique consultant reviewed our
what it says. Describe in general terms The stimulus will be presented as a paragraph or operation and
 how the author makes his/her point. conversation between two people. Argumentative determined the company
Argument: ask for a description of the Predict: Provide a description of the argumentative strategy needs to double
argumentative technique used in the technique used in the stimulus production at the Ohio
stimulus Evaluate: Find the answer that matches the Responds to plant. Therefore, we must
Statement: ask for the function of a prediction By increase production right
particular statement in the stimulus away to reach that goal.
Technique The author uses what
technique to make his
argument?
PARADOX Ask you to make something that doesn’t Resolve
make sense into something that does.
A paradox exists when an argument Apparent
contains two or more inconsistent discrepancy
statements.
Paradox
Resolve or reconcile an apparent
discrepancy Explains

Surprising result
POINT AT Agree: ask for a point on which two
ISSUE speakers would agree
Disagree: ask for a point on which two
speakers would disagree
MAIN POINT Identify: ask you to paraphrase the main
conclusion in the stimulus Supply: ask
you to supply the main conclusion for the
stimulus
ROLE OF A
STATEMENT
IMPACT Strengthen: ask you to select information
that supports the argument
Weaken: ask you to select information
that undermines the argument
Evaluate: ask you to select a question
which best tests the argument’s validity
EXCEPT
Keywords – Reading Comprehension

Logic (Evidence & Conclusion) Therefore

Conclude
Contrast However
But
Continuation Also
Next
Furthermore
Illustration For example
To Illustrate
Emphasis /Opinion Important
Clearly
Very
Sequence First
Secondly
Dates