Weaken Questions in Logical Reasoning Section

Key Takeaways

• Prevalence: Weaken questions make up 9% of all logical reasoning questions.
• Skills Transfer: Skills learned in weakening questions are applicable to strengthening and paradox questions.

Goals of the Lesson

1. Spotting a weaken question
2. Process for approaching weaken questions
3. Reasoning structures needed for evaluation
4. Trap answer patterns

Identifying a Weaken Question

• Look at the question stem.
• Phrases that indicate a weaken question:
  • "most seriously weakens"
  • "casts the most doubt"
  • "most seriously undermines"
  • "weakens"
  • "casts doubt on"
• Important word: Most (suggests the answer must have the strongest impact)

Approach to Weaken Questions

• The process is the same as for any question in the assumption family (sufficient/necessary assumption, flaw, strengthen questions).

Steps

1. Find the conclusion
   • Essential to judge the argument.
2. Identify the evidence
   • Evidence doesn't always prove the conclusion 100%.
   • Concede the evidence but challenge the conclusion.
3. Evaluate the space between evidence and conclusion
   • Identify why the conclusion doesn't necessarily follow from the evidence.
4. Anticipate potential weak points in the argument
5. Eliminate wrong answers
   • Use anticipated weaknesses to identify traps.

Key Reasoning Structures

1. Comparison
   • Comparing two different things at a single point or at different points in time.
   • Key to identifying gaps in the argument.
2. Causation
   • Assertions of a causal relationship are strong but difficult to prove.
   • Weakening tactics may involve:
     • Providing alternative causes.
     • Examples of cause without effect or effect without cause.

Example Breakdown

• Conclusion Identification: Find the conclusion using language cues (words like "but", "because", "should").
• Evaluate Argument: Identify gaps between the premises and the conclusion (e.g., financial incentives in airline traveler example).
• Answer Choices Analysis:
  • Example: Business vs. leisure travelers
  • Eliminate choices too weak to impact argument.

Trap Answer Patterns

1. Too Weak: Answers that are not strong enough to impact the argument.
2. Out of Scope: Answers irrelevant to the argument context.
3. Opposite Effect: Answers that might strengthen the argument instead of weakening it.
4. Irrelevant Relationships: Incorrect logical connections.
5. Term Shifts: Shift in terms from argument to answer choice.
6. Degree Issues: Answers too weak compared to alternatives.

Summary

• Spotting weaken questions through specific language cues.
• Understanding causation and comparison as key reasoning structures in arguments.
• Identifying and eliminating trap answer choices.

Tip: Focus first on eliminating out-of-scope answers before dealing with those that differ in degrees of impact.