PrepTest 73, Logical Reasoning 1, Question 9
Summary
The essence of the content revolves around understanding how to undermine or weaken an argument by identifying and attacking its assumptions, specifically within the context of LSAT exam preparation.
- Undermining an argument involves attacking the assumptions that are not directly stated but are necessary for the argument's evidence to support its conclusion.
- The example provided illustrates a causal argument regarding the impact of tobacco advertising on the tendency to smoke, highlighting the importance of distinguishing between first-time smokers and those who continue to smoke.
- Identifying the assumptions involves ensuring the causal connection is not coincidental, there's no third factor causing the observed effect, and the relationship is not reversed.
- The correct answer choice (C) weakens the argument by suggesting that restrictions on tobacco advertising are imposed only after a negative attitude toward tobacco use is already widespread, indicating a reversed causality.
- Other answer choices are dismissed as irrelevant or not directly addressing the assumptions underlying the argument's conclusion.
Chapters
00:00
Understanding Argument Assumptions
00:20
Analyzing the Argument's Structure
01:24
Identifying and Attacking Assumptions
02:08
Evaluating Answer Choices