Techniques for Solving Weakens/Strengthens Verbal Questions

[SKaminski]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Hey Guys, i've been averaging an 11 on most of my MCAT Verbal sections, but i keep getting 4-5 "Weakens/Strengthens" questions wrong each time. I seem to have a really hard time.

Sometimes i'll chose the answer that undermines an assumption that the arguement is predicated on.

Example: Passage Context:
In classical times the need of a creed higher than the Olympian was felt, and Aeschylus, Sophocles and Plato finally evolved from the pleasant but crude polytheism the idea of a single, supreme and righteous Zeus. But the decay of Olympus led to a revival of old and the invasion of new magic cults among the people, while some philosophers were looking to a vision of the uniformity of nature under divine and universal law.

6) Which of the following, if true, would most WEAKEN the author's claim that the ancient Greek idea of Zeus was an evolution away from polytheism.

A. The vast majority of Ionian philosophers never believed in Zeus.
B. The magic cults which were revived were monotheistic.
C. The idea of Zeus also caused the common people to obey the laws of ancient Greece.
D. Sophocles envisioned the persona of Zeus as a single body which enclosed a variety of personalities similar in their behaviors to the former Olympian gods.

My answer: B. If the religions that were replaced by Zeus were Monotheistic, not polytheistic, then it would weaken the argument that Zeus was a move away from polytheism.

TPRH's answer: D. This statement, if true, indicates that the idea of Zeus as "single, supreme, righteous" (line 24) could coexist with a belief in multiple gods. Now the gods express themselves through Zeus, but they may still exist as distinct and identifiable personalities.

My rebuttal: That concept, firstly, sounds more like Pantheism, not polytheism. Besides that small quibble, answer D says nothing about what the religious environment was prior to Zeus. "moving away" from a belief is a comparison between then and now. For these two reasons, answer B is a better answer

But that doesn't seem like its always right. Sometimes i'll try to chose the answer that directly counters the question itself. Anyways, my general question is: What techniques/strategies do you use in answering these question types?

 

[SKaminski]

So, any ideas here? Should i attack the assumption that the argument is based on? The argument itself? The point that is proving? What seems most effective for you all?

 

[gwjib04]

I think they wanted you to focus on the "author's claim [about] the idea of Zeus". Yes, B addresses the evolution away from polytheism because the magic cults are monotheistic but it doesn't address how Zeus is related.

I also preferred B but I think that response is a "trap". Its short and really easy to understand. Also, all the other responses mention Zeus directly which is a key element of the question. I keep telling myself, this is a reading comprehension test. Gotta be extremely attentive to the nature of the question prompt.

My experience studying for this exam pushes me more and more to look for superficial clues to the right answer. Here that would be what I mentioned about 75% of the answers mentioning Zeus. From my experience, the correct answer is only an "outlier" answer if its a max/min type question.

I'll go back to my verbal notes and see if I can come up with something deeper than that.

 

[SKaminski]

I think they wanted you to focus on the "author's claim [about] the idea of Zeus". Yes, B addresses the evolution away from polytheism because the magic cults are monotheistic but it doesn't address how Zeus is related.

I also preferred B but I think that response is a "trap". Its short and really easy to understand. Also, all the other responses mention Zeus directly which is a key element of the question. I keep telling myself, this is a reading comprehension test. Gotta be extremely attentive to the nature of the question prompt.

My experience studying for this exam pushes me more and more to look for superficial clues to the right answer. Here that would be what I mentioned about 75% of the answers mentioning Zeus. From my experience, the correct answer is only an "outlier" answer if its a max/min type question.

I'll go back to my verbal notes and see if I can come up with something deeper than that.

Thats a pretty good point, about 75% of the questions all mentioning Zeus. It seems like such a Cop out though. It would be easy enough to say that B deals with "before and after Zeus" which is what is meant by "moving away from pantheism" and that since none the right answer didnt deal with a before/after, it is not more correct.

Ugh. I hate weakens/strengthens 🙁

 

[WSHRocks]

Hey Guys, i've been averaging an 11 on most of my MCAT Verbal sections, but i keep getting 4-5 "Weakens/Strengthens" questions wrong each time. I seem to have a really hard time.

Sometimes i'll chose the answer that undermines an assumption that the arguement is predicated on.


But that doesn't seem like its always right. Sometimes i'll try to chose the answer that directly counters the question itself. Anyways, my general question is: What techniques/strategies do you use in answering these question types?

This is my interpretation without having the passage in front of me:

A) The argument in the passage does not concern itself with ZEUS vs. another god being evidence for an evolution.

B) The passage excerpt itself states that the magic cults that were REVIVED were OLD. How can Zeus lead to an evolution away from polytheism if the development of these monotheistic magic cults happened before Zeus came into existence?

C) Irrelevant - I don't see anything in that excerpt suggesting that the laws of ancient Greece were dependent on a belief in polytheism

D) Best answer. This shows traces of polytheism, where Zeus can be thought of as a multi-god entity.

Might have reasoned it differently if I had the whole passage, but I think my argument against choice B is rather clear. Strengthens/Weakens requires you to know exactly what the argument is so that you can figure out which answer choice would be most effective. This one just required you to analyze the passage more, which IMO is less representative of the AAMCs, where - knowing the argument well - they usually won't be quite as particular. Still, this is great practice for really analyzing what is being said at word-for-word level.

 

[Deadlifts]

B also would not necessarily weaken the author's argument that Zeus was a shift away from polytheism.

 

[SKaminski]

This is my interpretation without having the passage in front of me:

A) The argument in the passage does not concern itself with ZEUS vs. another god being evidence for an evolution.

B) The passage excerpt itself states that the magic cults that were REVIVED were OLD. How can Zeus lead to an evolution away from polytheism if the development of these monotheistic magic cults happened before Zeus came into existence?

C) Irrelevant - I don't see anything in that excerpt suggesting that the laws of ancient Greece were dependent on a belief in polytheism

D) Best answer. This shows traces of polytheism, where Zeus can be thought of as a multi-god entity.

Might have reasoned it differently if I had the whole passage, but I think my argument against choice B is rather clear. Strengthens/Weakens requires you to know exactly what the argument is so that you can figure out which answer choice would be most effective. This one just required you to analyze the passage more, which IMO is less representative of the AAMCs, where - knowing the argument well - they usually won't be quite as particular. Still, this is great practice for really analyzing what is being said at word-for-word level.

I'm not quiet sure if i understand.

Speaking to answer B), if the religions of old were monotheistic, then moving towards a multi-being god wouldn't be a move away from polytheism. It stops the argument in its tracks.

When you look at answer D), this is also a decent answer, but it is the concept of Pantheism, which is very similar to Polytheism.

Wouldn't negating the argument of "moving away from pantheism" be more pertinent than negating the argument of what they moved towards? It undercuts the chronology more.

 

[WSHRocks]

I'm not quiet sure if i understand.

Speaking to answer B), if the religions of old were monotheistic, then moving towards a multi-being god wouldn't be a move away from polytheism. It stops the argument in its tracks.

When you look at answer D), this is also a decent answer, but it is the concept of Pantheism, which is very similar to Polytheism.

Wouldn't negating the argument of "moving away from pantheism" be more pertinent than negating the argument of what they moved towards? It undercuts the chronology more.

Answer B is independent of answer D. There is nothing in the passage about Zeus being a multi-being god. Even if these religions were new (validating "evolution"), the answer does not most weaken the premise of movement away from polytheism, because answer D shows it better. To my mind, rejecting B hinges on the question stem concerning "evolution," where answer B is instead a reversion chronologically (the idea did not evolve from the idea of Zeus).

Also, you can't use outside information to justify or reject answer D - not only is pantheism not addressed in the passage, but by definition pantheism means that all and everything is god. The answer only suggests that Zeus can be thought of as the ancient Greek pantheon embodied in one god, not the pantheon and all of nature (and the universe, etc.). I'd be very careful about the precision of your definitions if you decide to use outside knowledge to justify an answer, but it's almost never needed.