LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

Get expert LSAT preparation and law school admissions advice from PowerScore Test Preparation.

General questions relating to LSAT Reading Comprehension.
 pacer
  • Posts: 57
  • Joined: Oct 20, 2014
|
#17338
I am not sure if my understanding or method here is correct.

When I read a passage, I categorize premises into 2 broad groups, especially for the purpose of weaken, strengthen and most similar question types.

1. Use of specific examples - study, research, case, another example cited to make a broad universal conclusion

- to weaken this, one could use falsification by showing an alternate or prove that it is not enough support for the conclusion being made

2. Use of theory, axiom or definition to make a specific conclusion to a case discussed by the author

- I am not sure how to strengthen/weaken the claim when this type of premise is used
 David Boyle
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 836
  • Joined: Jun 07, 2013
|
#17355
pacer wrote:I am not sure if my understanding or method here is correct.

When I read a passage, I categorize premises into 2 broad groups, especially for the purpose of weaken, strengthen and most similar question types.

1. Use of specific examples - study, research, case, another example cited to make a broad universal conclusion

- to weaken this, one could use falsification by showing an alternate or prove that it is not enough support for the conclusion being made

2. Use of theory, axiom or definition to make a specific conclusion to a case discussed by the author

- I am not sure how to strengthen/weaken the claim when this type of premise is used
Hello,

Your classification is interesting, though maybe other people have other classifications. As for your question, how about proving or disproving the axiom? If the axiom is given as perfect, e.g., in the stimulus of a Must Be True question, the axiom may be unchangeable and may not need strengthening (and can't be weakened).
Of course, if common sense tells you it can be weakened, go ahead. E.g., "By definition, Crunchee Cereal is the best in the world." If, however, an answer choice says that most people eating Crunchee drop dead from Ebola five minutes later, I think that would weaken the definition! And if there are 100 scientific studies that show Crunchee has more nutrients than any other cereal, and that it has certain ingredients which physiologists agree please the taste buds more than any other cereal does, then maybe that would strengthen the definition.

David

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

Analyze and track your performance with our Testing and Analytics Package.