Identifying Principle Questions

[lsatjourneygirl]

I am still having trouble identifying principle questions.

I am pasting a few examples I have come across that have confused me. Aside from identification, if you could clarify the rolls for parallel vs strengthen vs justify, as far as what you look for differently in the answer choices, that would be much appreciated!

Thank you!

"which one of the following most accurately expresses the principle underlying the argument above?" (this would be an assumption PR)

"The conclusion of the judge’s argument is most strongly supported if which one of the following principles is assumed to hold?" (justify PR)? Why can't this one be a strengthen or Must Be?

"Which of the following, if assumed, most helps justify?" Not sure

"Which one of the following, if true, justifies the above application of the principle?"

[Adam Tyson]

Principle questions are not a question type of their own - they are an overlay, if you will, on many other question types. Principles are simply rules, sometimes narrow and sometimes broad, often conditional and opinion-based ("if you are in Group X then you should do Z") but not always.

If you are asked about a principle or a proposition or a guideline, you are being asked about a rule. You might be asked to use that rule to strengthen or weaken or justify an argument, or you might be asked to pick an answer that follows the rule, or you might be asked to say what the rule is.

For your second example, it most certainly is a strengthen principle (a rule that, if true, helps improve the argument) and not a justify. We can tell this because the stem lessens the amount of justification by saying "most strongly supported" rather than "is justified" or "follows logically" or something absolute like those. Your third example is the same, a strengthen principle - don't let the presence of "assumed" here throw you off. "If assumed" is the same as "if true" or "if accepted". This one also lessens the amount of justification by using the phrase "most helps". The last one is a justify - there's no lessening, no hedging, it's about pure, total justification, absolute proof.

I hope that helped!

[lsacgals101]

Adam,
I'm wondering if you are suggesting that the question stem below (that lsatjourneygirl inquired about) is merely asking us to "pick an answer that follows the rule" as you said... or if we are being "asked to say what the rule is" as you mentioned above... or if this would be classified as an assumption-principle question, as lsatjourneygirl intially thought?


Question stem:
"which one of the following most accurately expresses the principle underlying the argument above?"

[Brook Miscoski]

lsacgals,

There are two interpretations of that question; both result in the same answer choice. My natural read of the question you propose is that it's asking us to state the rule that the stimulus uses or needs. But let's see what would happen if someone felt indecisive about how to proceed.

The question clearly asks you to state (express) the principle. So there are two approaches:

1. Which answer choice does the stimulus rely on?

Answer--the choice that must be true for the stimulus to be correct.

2. What answer choice describes the reasoning of the stimulus?

Answer--doesn't change the result-you're just approaching it descriptively.

If one isn't helping you, try the other.