# LR Bible framework.

#### Brian7

##### LR Bible framework.
« on: September 10, 2004, 01:10:19 AM »
I'm not sure that posting this summary is legal, but expect that the study-purpose-uses have some leniency.

After reading LR Bible, you could use this summary when approaching LR questions

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Primary Objective #1
Determine where the stimulus contains an argument or if it only a set of factual statements.

Primary Objective #2
If the stimulus contains an argument, identify the conclusion of the argument.
If the stimulus contains a fact set, examine each fact.

Primary Objective #3
If the stimulus contains an argument, determine if the argument is strong or weak.

Primary Objective #4
Read closely and know precisely what the author said. Do not generalize!

-------------------------------------------------------
Primary Objective #5
Carefully read and identify the question stem.
Do not assume that certain words automatically associated with certain question types.

Primary Objective #6
Prephrase: after reading the question stem,
take a moment to mentally formulate your answer to the question stem.

-------------------------------------------------------
Primary Objective #7
Always read each of the five answer choices.

Primary Objective #8
Separate the answer choices into Contenders and Losers.
After you complete this process, review the Contenders and decide which answer is the correct one.

Primary Objective #9
If all five answer choices appear to be Losers,
return to the stimulus and re-evaluate the argument.

Family#1  (<---)
Must Be True
- Fact Test: by referring to the facts stated in the stimulus
- Correct Answers: paraphrased, combined statements in the stimulus
- Incorrect Answers: Could Be True, Broader, New Info., Shell Game, Opposite, Reverse

Main Point

Point at Issue
- Incorrect Answers: Ethical versus Factual Situation, Dual Agreement or Disagreement, Unknown View
- Agree/Disagree Test

Method of Reasoning

Flaw in the Reasoning

Parallel Reasoning
- Method of Reasoning --> Conclusion --> Premises --> Validity of the Argument
- Abstract the "action" in the argument

Family#2  (--->)
Strengthen/Support
- Identify the conclusion
- Personalize the argument
- Look for weakness or holes in the argument
- Incorrect answers: Opposite, Shell Game, Out of Scope

Justify the Conclusion
- Justify Formula: Premises + Answer choice = Conclusion
- Correct Answer: "new" element in the conclusion

Assumption
- Conclusion --> Assumption
- Supporter/Defender
- Negation Technique

Evaluate the Argument (#2, #3)
- Variance Test by supplying two opposite responses

Family#3  (-+->)
Weaken
- scenarios: Incomplete Information, Improper Comparison, Qualified Conclusion.
- Incorrect Answers: Opposite, Shell Game, Out of Scope
- conditional conclusion: attack the necessary condition

Family#4  (<-+-)
Cannot Be True
- conditional statement: necessary condition doesn't occur

-------------------------------------------------------

Principle
- Must Be True-PR
- Strengthen-PR
- Must Be True-PR and Conditionality

Conditional Reasoning (conditionality)

Cause and Effect Reasoning(causality)

Formal Logic
- Logic Ladder ( All ---> Most ---> Some )
- Always combine common terms, Some Train, Most Train
- "A <--M-- B --M--> C" means some A's are C's.

Numbers and Percentages
- They don't always move together.

#### richbass

##### Re: LR Bible framework.
« Reply #1 on: September 10, 2004, 06:55:35 AM »
Thanks a lot man... that was really helpful...

I just had one question for you.  Do you think you could elaborate on what exactly the agree/disagree test is?

Thanks again,
Rich

#### tjordan90

• 130
• 3.44 / 164
##### Re: LR Bible framework.
« Reply #2 on: September 11, 2004, 10:24:42 AM »
Thanks a lot man... that was really helpful...

I just had one question for you.  Do you think you could elaborate on what exactly the agree/disagree test is?

Thanks again,
Rich

Basically, in selecting the correct answer, one author would respond with "I agree."  The other author would respond with "I disagree."  If both agree or both disagree, the answer is not correct.