Flashcards in Verbal Strategies Deck (28):
If you see a sent that supports the conclusion, "because of", "as a result of", "due to", "since", "after all"
- All arguments will have a premise (only one that does), not all will have a conclusion
- Can be fact or opinion
- Signal words like because signal that it supports the conclusion"
If you see a sent that negates the conclusion or premise, "however, but, yet, even so, nevertheless
"Counterpremise, counterpoint, could look like background / premise, but difference is that this negates
- if another sentence says however and goes against this, then this is the counter"
If you see a sent. that is context, doesn't support / negate conclusion"
- Could be tacked onto a conclusion, be careful "
If you see sent. that is the author's opinion or claim, "therefore, thus, consequently"
- Could be part of a sentence, background / premise/ counter right before"
If you see a claim that looks like a conclusion, but another conclusion too
- Use because A....therefore B test
- B is the final conclusion, A may be a premise or an intermed concl"
Steps for CR questions and what not to do
1. Identify the question
2. Deconstruct argument
3. State the goal
4. Work from wrong to right (impt to not get tempted by wrong answer, only compare once and move on, you don't know it you won't know it)
DON'T skim the argument and not understand big pic -> you end up rereading a bunch of times. BAD
Structure based CR ?s
Describe the role of 2 boldfaces
Describe the argument
Assumption based ?s
Find the assumption
Strengthen the argument
Weaken the argument
Evaluate the argument - find something that'll help the arg
Find the flaw
All of these require you to find the assumption
Evidence based ?s
These don't have conclusions or assumptions, just premises
Inference - what can be concluded (find something that's true)
Explain a discrepancy
Common CR issues
- Amount vs %
- cause and effect is flipped
What's the role of the boldface? Trick:
Ask 1. fact or opinion 2. for or against 3. are the 2 bolds same or opposite side
- In choices if see evidence --> fact, claim --> opinion
Be careful of extreme words - if it says CONTRADICT the argument
The statement must really undermine conclusion. If there's a perhaps, then author isn't totally disregarding conclusion.
Need to see that the author is directly attacking
Watch out for 1 wrong word
Choice may have correct except 1 word: budget shortfall vs recycling plan effect
4 steps for Role questions
1. ID ? - boldface --> role, 2 people in Q
2. Deconstruct arg - find C, P, X, +/-
3. State goal - know desired labels! (+/i, looking for C? P? A?
4. Wrong to right - beware of half right choices
4 steps for finding assumption questions
1. ID ? - "assume / assumption"
2. Deconstruct - find conclusion, think of assumptions
3. Goal - assumption must be true for concl
4. Wrong to right - use negation, negate assumption and see if it hurts concl - if you're stuck (time consuming though)
Beware of assumption with no tie to conclusion, irrelev comparison, reverse logic
Negating choices -
better than -->
Some of them liked it more -->
equal to or less than (don't forget equal)
None of them liked it more
Specific numbers in answer choices to be an assumption
Be wary of them, is that number absolutely true? If it can be another number, that assumption doesn't have to be true
Strengthen / weaken concl - beware of directionally say + or -, but
not concluding the same thing
If ex is employees lose confidence bc of co viability, talking about a competitor's raise is a negative, but doesn't have anything to do with co viability and losing confidence bc of it
4 steps for strengthen Qs
1. ID question - "strengthen, support, if true", fill in the blank "because, since"
2. Deconstruct - find conclusion, brainstorm assump
3. Goal - find new piece of info that supports arg
4. Wrong to right - beware of no tie to concl, weaken answers
Weaken answers can attack assumption
ex: employees lose confid in viability --> quit
weaken: competitor provides health ins so that's why they quit, not bc lose confid
Each of the following, if true, weakens the conclusion EXCEPT
5th one doesn't have to strengthen ,could also be neutral, does nothing. Label S, W, N - so you know to pick the S or N
Label Q as Wex
4 steps for weaken Q
1. ID Q - "weaken, undermine, if true"
2. Deconstruct - find concl, think of assump
3. Goal - weaken or make arg less valid
4. Wrong to right - beware of reverse logic (strengthen) or no tie to arg
Watch out for which perspective you're proving, ex: contention by the gvt
Gvt's perspective - even if it says contention by, that just means the disagreement made by the gvt
CR questions - don't forget to read the....
QUESTION! ID the Q **
As vs like
As in front of clause
Like in front of noun, never clause
Common CR inference (draw conclusion) errors
Not relevant (IRV)
Info not provided in argument, can’t conclude. No evidence for a random claim (IDK)
1-2 wrong words
Test wth extremes, can this conclusion be possible with very little or a billion
Contradict what’s been given
Inference: Draw a conclusion Q - you have to
Find an answer that's actually true by what you're given. you're not making any actual new conclusions