Verbal Reasoning: How to tackle the "most weakens the argument" type questions.

[NinjaMed]

---

Members do not see this ad.

How do you tackle those passages with:

Which of these claims, if true, would most weaken the author's argument that [X]?

What is the mindset that you adopt?

What is the quickest way to analyze the answers, and find the right one?

What are the steps involved?

1. think back to what the author's argument was
2. test each answer choice against this argument
3. find the one that someone would use to argue or debate against the author

This seems to make sense, but also seems to take up too much time
Is there another way of doing it?

 

[Silverfalcon]

Refer back to the passage. It's pretty obvious if you do this.

 

[NinjaMed]

The claims that are listed are assumptions and are not found in the passage.

Sometimes they may appear as common sayings that, on the surface, may even have nothing to do with the passage. This was found a few times in the EK materials.

What is the method of attack?
The answers may even be vague, and really seem unrelated to the passage.
(from EK 101) They must relate to the main idea, or main thrust of the passage, which all four answers seem to comply with, but the hard part comes in how could something so vague and unrelated actually attack the author's argument, or weaken it?

 

[Snuke]

The "most weakens" answer generally directly contradicts something that was said in passage, though not always. Some inference is needed on occasion, but a careful reading of the passage (you should have an idea of where the answer should be, so skim if you read carefully the first time) should prove it. There should be one best answer, even if there are two or three that are possible.

 

[G1SG2]

When approaching this question, sometimes I take a few seconds before looking at the answer choices to sort of think about the main idea and what would undermine it/contradict it. Then I look at the answer choices, and a lot of the time there's one that falls in line with what I had in mind.

 

[Silverfalcon]

The claims that are listed are assumptions and are not found in the passage.

Sometimes they may appear as common sayings that, on the surface, may even have nothing to do with the passage. This was found a few times in the EK materials.

What is the method of attack?
The answers may even be vague, and really seem unrelated to the passage.
(from EK 101) They must relate to the main idea, or main thrust of the passage, which all four answers seem to comply with, but the hard part comes in how could something so vague and unrelated actually attack the author's argument, or weaken it?

Assumptions are not found in the passage but the basis of the correct assumptions are.

I really think that EK Verbal is well-written text. In order to know if something weakens/strengthens the statement asserted by the author, you need to think like an authorand only rely on what he/she told you.

 

[I say mm]

I got testprep-online's guide for the verbal section and it specifies each question type with examples and strategies. with their practice i improved my score by 3-4 points. the problem is i hate physics and i just can't get it to more then 7-8's.