Numbers and Percentages

[Dave Killoran]

Hi Kmikaeli,

Remember, when you are working with an Assumption question stimulus, you aren't "applying" anything; you are simply seeking the assumption made by the author. In this sense you are reactive, and simply trying to determine what the author did. You don't have to do anything more than that, and you don't have to apply and assumption to these questions.

In these questions, one of the things you see is the author frequently making assumptions about information that hasn't been given, and since these are numbers and percentages questions, you find that it is usually an assumption about group sizes, rising or falling numbers, growing or contracting percentages, or what happens to other players in the market, etc. The exact assumption depends on the specifics of the questions (you see how that happens so frequently? I'm often saying it to you ).

For example, let's say an author makes the following argument:

• Last year, Kville had 1,000,000 residents and it was the largest city in Mlandia. This year Kville has 1,100,000 residents. Therefore, Kville is still the largest city in Mlandia.

When you read that, do you think it is a good argument? Probably not! But why? Well, because another city could have added even more residents and moved past Kville. And that reveals the main assumption here: that no other city added enough residents to move past Kville.

So, in analyzing that argument, all I needed to do was look at what the author was thinking and then identify the answer that reflects that thinking. Of course, I filter that through my own analysis, which often asks what's wrong with the argument, because that makes it easier for me to figure out what the author is thinking.

It works the same way for all these Assumption-#% questions—you just have to look inside the author's thinking to find what they assumed.

Please let me know if that helps. Thanks!

[Kmikaeli]

It gets confusing when, the assumption chapter tells you of supporter assumptions and you are trying to determine new/rogue elements.

Also, Must Be True questions are devastating me as well, but I figured much paraphrasing and consequence connection about the detail pertaining to the numbers and percentages persist, and I use that to find out what must be true.

I noticed strengthening and weakening questions with numbers and percentages look at the assumption based around the misconception so hence the total number fallacy.

[Dave Killoran]

It gets confusing when, the assumption chapter tells you of supporter assumptions and you are trying to determine new/rogue elements.

Keep in mind that you are still doing the same thing with Assumption-#% questions, but that the missing element now deals with something numerically related. You're not doing anything different, just narrowing the focus of what you are looking for in the correct answer choice a bit

Keep working with it, and I believe it will start to make more sense. These questions aren't any different than what you've seen earlier; they just tend to focus on this specific idea (numbers and percentages) which the test makers like to put in a fair amount of questions.

Thanks!

[Kmikaeli]

So, the only difference is that now I have numbers and percentages?

So for must be true I ue my ability of consequence connections to paraphrase something from the stimulus to be best proven in the correct answers?

[Dave Killoran]

So, the only difference is that now I have numbers and percentages?

Yes, that sums it up pretty well!

So for must be true I ue my ability of consequence connections to paraphrase something from the stimulus to be best proven in the correct answers?

Let me make two clarifications to what you've said above. First, "consequence connections" is a term that we use in relation to Rule Substitution questions in the LG section. If you mean that if you see provable consequences from the stimulus in the answer choices of a MBT question, then yes, that would be correct. Second, you would indeed want to use your prephrasing as you attack MBT answer choices, and if you saw something that was a paraphrase of a statement for the stimulus, that too would be correct. But the correct answer doesn't have to be a paraphrase.

Please let me know if that makes sense. Thanks!

[Kmikaeli]

Oh yes, "consequences of the statements presented in the stimulus" for must be true questions is essentially quite similar to supporter assumptions where different elements of importance are put together to produce a new idea which in both cases produces an assumption/unstated premise that can then be the correct answer for both assumption and must be true questions because both look for what must be true and assumed by the author.

While weaken questions bring the assumption to light and state how there may be incomplete information or anything else that will directly hinder the assumption and thus the conclusion is weakened.