Flawed Assumption Questions?

[avengingangel]

On pg. 369 of 2016 version, can you please expand upon the last part of the page about Flawed Assumption Questions? Specifically, the part that says "Note that within regular Assumption questions there is already a need to identify flawed assumptions, in the form of certain answer choices which typically start with the following phrases (or something similar): 'presumes, without providing justification,...' 'takes for granted that...' "

I was just caught off guard because I don't remember covering that up to this point in the book, or seeing those answer choices before. I wasn't aware that "there is already a need..." if that makes sense. If someone could just elaborate a little bit on whatever I'm not understanding(or even point to where this was previously covered in the chapter / book), that would be great. Thanks!

[Nikki Siclunov]

Hi angel,

Thanks for your question! What the book is referring to is actually the wording of certain answers to Flaw in the Reasoning questions, where the answer choice often begins with phrases such as "presumes, without providing justification" and "takes for granted that." Given that such phrases invariably introduce potential assumptions (that the author may or may not have made), you can attack such answer choices in the same way as you do Assumption answers: use the Assumption Negation Technique to test if the alleged fallacious assumption was indeed made.

When we say that "within regular Assumption questions there is already a need to identify flawed assumptions," what we mean is that the vast majority of arguments in stimuli followed by Assumption questions will be quite weak. Such arguments are bound to contain numerous logical gaps, and make any number of unwarranted assumptions. Of course, whether an assumption is warranted or not is sometimes a matter of subjective judgment, and Assumption questions will not ask you to make such a distinction.

Hope this helps! Let me know

Thanks,

[leslie7]

Hello,

to elaborate (2020 ed. pg 394 ) what the flawed assumption question is saying is that a flawed assumption question is equal to or the same as an assumption question and that this is similar but not the same as a flaw in the reasoning question?

Reading this page to me a flawed assumption question is the same as an assumption question - I'm trying to figure out what key points the book is trying to tell us that makes it important to address the flawed assumption question seperately?

[Dave Killoran]

Hi Leslie,

Yes, it is an Assumption question, but one where you know they made that Assumption in error. So, in that sense you know there's a problem. It is the joining of two concepts, and a twist on a traditional Assumption question.

In simpler terms, the assumed something that turned out to be a mistake to have assumed. We do this in everyday life with some frequency, so it's not a foreign concept. But like many LSAT questions, the makers of this test turn it into a more formalized exercise, which can make it seem foreign and uncomfortable.

Thanks!

[leslie7]

Hi Leslie,

Yes, it is an Assumption question, but one where you know they made that Assumption in error. So, in that sense you know there's a problem. It is the joining of two concepts, and a twist on a traditional Assumption question.

In simpler terms, the assumed something that turned out to be a mistake to have assumed. We do this in everyday life with some frequency, so it's not a foreign concept. But like many LSAT questions, the makers of this test turn it into a more formalized exercise, which can make it seem foreign and uncomfortable.

Thanks!

ok, got it ! Ty so much !