neshdev / gre

Argument

An argument is made up of the the set of conclusions and evidences.

Main Conclusion

Every argument has a main conclusion. The main conclusion is the claim the author is trying to persuade the reader into believing is true.

The main conclusion does not support any other idea and can stand independently.

Conclusions can vary in degree from definite to indefinite. Definite conclusions are those that are categorically positioned. Indefinite conclusions are those that take different gradations between the categorical values.

Common types of Conclusions

Most conclusions can be discreetly partitioned into the below types.

1. Comparison Conclusion
   A comparison conclusion will compare two things against each other or will compare something with itself.

2. Causation Conclusion

   A causation conclusion will talk about causes and effects.

   An easy way to invalidate a causation conclusion is to provide an alternate explanation.

3. Assessment Conclusion

An assessment conclusion is giving a subjective attribute to something.

Ex: Blue is the most superior color

4. Recommendation Conclusion

A recommendation conclusion will assert for or against the best method or course of action.

5. Prediction Conclusion

A prediction conclusion will trying to forsee or infer a future event. This is usually based on past data.

6. Simple Belief Conclusion

This is a catch all conclusion. Technically, all conclusions are simple beliefs, but it is better to categorize and identify the above conclusions with their own types because we can use tactic to deduce the correct answer.

Evidence

Evidences are a set of premises that provide support for a claim.

The following are the most common types of evidences

1. Example - use a direct example
2. Appeal - appeal to an audience Is it strong enough?
3. Analogies - compare with something else See if two things are actually comparable.
4. Past - use history assert a position. Ask the question: is it possible that things have changed?
5. Generalize from a Samples - provide surveys, stats, etc... Be wary of scope shift.

Used in rebuttals:

5. Counter Example - use a direct example to negate a statement
6. Alternate Possibility
   1. if X -> Y, show that Z -> Y
   2. if X -> Y, show that X -> Z

Other types of evidence structure:

7. Conditional (X -> Y -> Z -> T)
8. Causation based on correlation. Carefully monitor that only one variable is changing the other.

Flaws

What’s the difference between Identifying a Flaw and Identifying a Weakener?

When you’re asked to identify a weakener, you’re essentially finding information in the choices that makes the argument worse than it currently is.

When you’re asked to identify a flaw, you’re not adding any information but rather simply describing why the argument as it stands isn’t logically strong. In other words, the argument is already unsound.

Below are the most common type of flaws

• Sampling Bias - Generalize from a sample to make claims on a whole population.
• Ad hominem - attack someones character, motive or belief
• False Dichotomy - pretending there is only two situations when there could be more
• Circular Reasoning - X because X
• Over generalization - generalize a statement without proper care
• Causation from Correlation - observe two events, X and Y, and conclude that one caused the other, X -> Y. Can have two faults.
  1. Y -> X
  2. Z -> X
• percent vs quantity - a percentage is not comparable with a number
• faulty analogy - scope shift
• lack of evidence
• Certainty vs Possibility - Event can happen but is not guaranteed to happened.
• Equivocation - Deliberately, confusing the reader

Strengthen/Weaken an argument:

Top tip: Add the choice to the argument. As you evaluate each choice, imagine that you’re adding the choice’s information to the argument. Which way does the argument move? There are only three things a choice could do: strengthen the argument weaken the argument have no effect on the argument

Explain or Resolve Question type

1. Identity the situation in your own words
2. Look for contrast keywords
3. Phrase the situation as a question
4. Test each choice as a response to the question you formulated