Mastering the LSAT: Techniques to Weaken Arguments

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

• A. Assumption
• B. Cannot Be True
• C. Weaken
• D. Parallel

Answer: (C)

The argument in the passage is based on the assumption that there is a correlation between two variables - success in school and success in life. The conclusion drawn is that academic success guarantees success in life. In order to weaken this argument, we need to find a statement that undermines the connection between academic success and success in life. Choice C, which is the correct answer, does exactly that by suggesting that some successful people did not perform well in school, thus weakening the assumption made in the argument. Options A, B, and D are not relevant to weakening the reasoning in the passage. Option A refers to assumptions, which are the basis of the argument and not necessarily contradictory. Option B discusses what cannot be true, which is not relevant for weakening the argument. Option D talks about parallel reasoning, which is not connected to undermining the original argument.

Understanding how to navigate the LSAT effectively is crucial for those aiming for impressive scores. One of the most frequently encountered question types on the LSAT is the argument analysis question, particularly when it comes to weak points. Consider this: if you want to excel, do you ever wonder how the relationship between academic success and overall life success plays into the exam? Let’s break that down a bit.

In typical LSAT fashion, one of the key goals when analyzing an argument is to identify its underpinning assumptions. This is pivotal because it allows you to see where the author might have missed the mark or, dare I say, where the argument crumbles just a little. Take the statement that academic success ensures a successful life. It’s a bold claim, and while it sounds reasonable on the surface, we all know, don't we? Not every thriving adult is a straight-A student. Just think about it – plenty of high school dropouts have created amazing products, helped thousands of people, or made significant strides in innovation. When we question that assumption of correlation, we’re engaging in what LSAT enthusiasts know as “weakening” the argument.

So, how do you pinpoint the right answer among the choices? You might have four options – A through D – where only one could effectively undermine the argument. Let’s break these down.

Choice A often refers to the underlying assumptions, and while they are essential to consider, they don’t truly go against what’s being argued. They merely support it. Option B might take you further away from the path, as it discusses things that “cannot be true.” That’s not helpful for weakening reasoning; in fact, it can be a distraction. And then there’s Option D, which brings up parallel reasoning. But hold on a second! Parallel reasoning isn’t about undermining anything; it’s about drawing similarities.

Now, let’s focus on the right answer – Choice C, which effectively weakens the argument. This relates back to our previous thoughts: it highlights that some successful individuals struggled academically, thereby questioning the idea that academic accolades equate to life achievements. This statement hits home, doesn’t it? It solidifies the reality that success isn’t a one-size-fits-all situation.

You see, mastering the LSAT isn’t just about understanding the test format; it’s about grasping the nuances of argumentation. Consider taking a few practice tests, but also focus on real-world examples that challenge these premises.

In conclusion, when prepping for the LSAT, always question the assumptions. Differentiate between what’s supporting the argument and what could genuinely weaken it. That’s the path to success. Not every connection is as strong as it appears, and being ready to dissect arguments will not only help you on the LSAT but in life too. Happy studying!