外语考试

您所在的位置: 滴答网 > 外语考试 > GMAT > 逻辑 > 正文

GMAT逻辑基本知识Weaken

滴答网 http://www.tigtag.com/  2013-11-19  互联网  我要评论(0)  阅读0

滴答网讯     作为入门GMAT逻辑的基本知识,这是考生第一步要牢牢掌握的,不了解这些入门级知识量,后期无法很好地学会GMAT逻辑。下面就为大家讲解GMAT逻辑基本知识第一课:Weaken。

Weaken

By now, I hope you have already had a better understanding of the way to identify premises and conclusions and the roles played by each sentence in an argument. In essence, main point, role, and proceed by are Must-Be-True types of questions, which do NOT allow NEW evidence. In the following posts I will talk about a few question types which allow NEW evidence.

Weaken

Common Prompts for Weakening questions:

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

Similar verbs: attack, call into question, cast doubt on, challenge, contradict, counter, damage, rebut, refute, undermine.

Before you look at the answers:

1. Pinpoint the main conclusion in the passage. (Read my previous Main Point post.)

2. Separate the premises from everything else. After you find the main point, don’t assume that all the other statements are premises; they might include opposing viewpoints, background information, and concessions.

3. Ask yourself, “Do the premises (exactly as they are stated in the passage) support the conclusion (exactly as it is stated in the passage)?” In other words, once discard everything else, how well do the premises support the conclusion? The reason you want to focus on exactly what the premises and the conclusion state is that you do not want to subconsciously make the argument better than it actually is. Do not help the author. Look at what he actually said and then decide whether his evidence stacks up:

Does the author make any unreasonable assumptions? For example, read the following statements: “We should support the proposed law, which requires government officials to disclose their annual incomes, because it will give ordinary citizens a fair chance to keep an eye on and more control over when and how elected officials receive gifts and benefits from lobbyists.” Watch out for should, moral ethical and other loaded conclusions. The test makers like to play off commonly held assumptions about what is right or wrong in our heads. This argument unreasonably assumes that “giving ordinary citizens a fair chance to keep an eye on and more control” is good. If this is the case, the author must clearly point out this premise in his argument.

上一页 1 2 下一页

0
0
论坛交流
问专家
相关 GMAT 逻辑 的新闻