LSAT Lab Lecture: Sufficient Assumption Questions
Overview
- Lecture by: Matt
- Topic: Sufficient Assumption Questions in Logical Reasoning
- Scope: Identification and solving of sufficient assumption questions, including examples and common trap answers.
- Frequency: Approximately 6% of logical reasoning questions.
Identifying Sufficient Assumption Questions
Key Elements:
- Language Clues: Look for clues in the question stems that indicate the answer guarantees the conclusion.
- Keywords indicating sufficiency: enables, ensures, suffices, allows, would make, if.
Examples
- Example Question Stems:
- The conclusion above is properly drawn if which one of the following is assumed?
- From which one of the following does the conclusion logically follow?
Process to Solve Sufficient Assumption Questions
- Find the Conclusion: Identify the main point of the argument.
- Find the Evidence: Gather supporting premises.
- Evaluate the Reasoning: Identify gaps in the argument and understand the assumptions needed to bridge these gaps.
- Anticipate the Answer: Based on the gap, predict what the correct answer should address.
- Match and Eliminate: Review answer choices, matching them to the anticipated assumption and eliminating trap answers.
Common Reasoning Structures
Conditional Logic
- Prevalence: 90% of sufficient assumption questions
- Key Idea: Use if-then relationships to make logical guarantees
- Example: If A then B. If B then C. Therefore, if A, then C.
Example Question Using Conditional Logic
- Conclusion: Murray cannot be accepted for the position of executive administrator.
- Evidence:
- An undergraduate degree is necessary for the executive board.
- No one with a felony conviction can be appointed to the board.
- Murray has the necessary degrees but also has a felony conviction.
- Gap and Assumption: If one can’t be appointed to the executive board due to a felony, they also cannot serve as an executive administrator.
Trap Answers to Avoid
- Negating conditions incorrectly
- Irrelevant premises
- Too weak answers
- Reinforcing the evidence rather than the conclusion
Comparative Reasoning
- Prevalence: 10% of sufficient assumption questions
- Key Concept: Compare sizes or amounts while ensuring no loss or addition of elements to ensure a logical conclusion.
- Example: Comparing percentages of something across different time frames and ensuring the comparison is valid based on absolute numbers.
Example Question Using Comparative Reasoning
- Argument: M contains twice as many cans as L.
- Evidence:
- All cans in L were recycled into cans in M.
- 50% of aluminum in M came from L.
- Aluminum content is negligible and uniform.
- Assumption: All aluminum from L was fully transferred to M without loss.
Avoiding Trap Answers on Comparative Questions
- Out of Scope: Answers not directly related to the argument’s context.
- Too Weak: Supporting the argument but not fully proving it.
- Irrelevant Relationships: Connections that do not pertain to the main argument.
- Future or past relevance: Answers not aligning with the argument's timeframe.
Summary
- Identify: Use language clues to identify sufficient assumption questions.
- Structure: Look out for conditional and comparative reasoning structures.
- Trap Patterns: Recognize and avoid common trap answers such as out-of-scope, too weak, irrelevant relationships, and support premises rather than conclusions.
- Practice: Focus on the process of finding gaps, anticipating answers, and eliminating wrong choices.
Check out other LSAT Lab resources or visit at LSATlab.com for more comprehensive guides and practice lessons.