Assumption

[Lawheart]

Is there an effective way to tell the difference between a Supporter and a Defender

[Adam Tyson]

In my experience, Lawheart, there really is no difference between them. Supporter and defender Assumptions are not two different kinds of assumption questions, but rather two different approaches to analyzing and prephrasing them. I often say that they are just two different lenses through which you can examine the same question.

Here's an example:

"Electric cars are better for the environment than cars that run on coal. Therefore, my car must be better for the environment than at least some other cars."

Is there a gap in the argument? You bet - there's one between "electric cars" and "my car," and another between "cars that run on coal" and "some other cars." A supporter assumption answer, then, might be "my car is an electric car". Another would be "some other cars run on coal."

Is there an obvious weakness in the argument? A couple of them, in my view. Who says my car is electric? And even if it was, who says there are any cars that run on coal? Two defender assumptions would therefore be (you guessed it) "my car is electric" and "some other cars run on coal." The same answers will be arrived at no matter which approach you take to the question!

Rather than try to classify the question as a supporter or a defender, think about your prephrase fitting into one of those models. If you see the argument as having an obvious gap, prephrase something to fill the gap, and if you see it as having an inherent weakness, prephrase something to fight off that weakness. Sometimes a stimulus will be clearly better handled one way than the other, and sometimes it won't matter which lens you look through. What matters is that you have a plan of attack that works for you.