Assumption = """

Assumption questions ask you to identify the missing link in the logic of the stimulus
argument.
Some example question stems are
1. Which one of the following, if assumed, allows the argument’s conclusion to be
properly drawn?
2. Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
3. The final conclusion above follows logically if which one of the following is
assumed?
4. The claim made by the official in the argument above depends on the presupposition
that
5. Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument relies?

Note: "Presupposition” is simply another word that the LSAT uses for assumption

Strategies
The most time-efficient way to answer assumption questions is to recognize the missing
link in the argument as you read the stimulus. Sometimes, the wording of the argument
and the answer choices can be confusing. So, you might want to employ the technique
of negating the answer choices that you want to test. 

Because an assumption is an unstated piece of evidence, this technique “knocks out”
each answer choice that you test, one by one. When you test the correct answer, you are
knocking out a piece of evidence, and the argument should suffer accordingly.
In tutoring sessions, we often use the analogy of testing to see if a wall within a house
or an office is important to the structure by knocking the wall down to see if the roof
falls in. If the roof falls in, we have shown that the wall was important. If there is no
effect on the structure, the wall was not a load-bearing wall. In other words, the wall
was irrelevant to the strength of the structure.

"""


Weaken_Strengthen = """

You will have to attack a significant number of weaken and strengthen questions in
order to end up with a respectable LSAT score. This question type also sometimes
appears in the Reading Comprehension section of the exam. Since the LSAT is set up to
test your understanding of the structure of arguments, the correct answer choices for
weakening and strengthening questions will more often undermine or support their
respective conclusions structurally rather than by directly attacking stated evidence, or
by providing new evidence. You can undermine conclusions by finding a key assumption
in the argument and then finding the answer choice that will make that assumption
more likely to be true or less likely to be true, as the case may be.

Note: Remember that weakening an argument does not mean disproving it completely and strengthening an
argument does not mean proving it beyond all doubt. To strengthen an argument is to make the conclusion
more likely to be true, and to weaken an argument is to make the conclusion at least somewhat less
likely to be true.

Some example question stems are

Weaken:
1. Which one of the following, if true, would most weaken the above argument?
2. The prediction that ends the paragraph would be most seriously called into question
if it were true that
3. Which one of the following, if true, most weakens the researcher’s argument?
4. Which one of the following, if true, most calls into question the argument that…?
5. Which one of the following, if true, most undermines the conclusion?
6. Which one of the following, if true, would be the strongest challenge to the
author’s conclusion?

Strengthen:
1. Which one of the following, if established, does most to justify the position
advanced by the passage?
2. Which one of the following, if true, provides the best reason in favor of the
proposal?
3. Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
4. Which of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the scientist’s
reasoning?
5. Which one of the following, if true, most helps to support the claim that…?
6. Which one of the following, if true, most supports the proposal?

Strategies
To answer either a weaken or strengthen question, you must first identify the key
assumptions in the argument. This should become second nature to you as you practice
for test day. Once you become proficient at identifying assumptions, you can more easily
choose answers that either support or undermine them. In some cases of weaken
questions, the correct answer actually contradicts a statement made in the stimulus
argument.

"""
Conclusion = """

These questions ask you to draw a conclusion from evidence presented within the stimulus.
In some cases, the conclusion that you are asked to draw is based on only part of
the stimulus and will not necessarily be the main idea of the stimulus paragraph. Some
conclusion questions use the terms “infer” and “imply.”

Note: Remember that “imply” and “infer” are just two sides of the same coin; the speaker, or author, implies and
the listener, or reader, infers.

Some example question stems are
1. If the statements above are true, which one of the following must also be true on
the basis of them?
2. If the environmentalist’s statements are true, they provide the most support for
which one of the following?
3. Which one of the following statements is most strongly supported by the information
above?
4. Amy’s reply is structured to lead to which one of the following conclusions?
5. Which one of the following inferences is most strongly supported by the information
above?
6. Which one of the following can be properly inferred from the argument above?
Strategies
To correctly answer these questions you must consider the validity of the argument.
Look for the logical end of the chain of reasoning started in the stimulus argument.

"""
Method_of_Argument = """

Method of argument questions ask you to recognize the way that the argument is put
together. You must choose the answer that properly describes the structure of the stimulus
argument. Some, but certainly not all, method of argument questions are based on
dialogues.
Some examples of question stems are
1. The scientist’s argument proceeds by
2. Trillian’s response to Douglas proceeds by
3. Karen uses which one of the following argumentative techniques in countering
Rob’s argument?
4. The argument criticizing the essay employs which one of the following strategies?
5. The relationship of Svetlana’s statement to Katalya’s argument is that Svetlana’s
statement

Strategies
To answer these questions correctly, you must pay attention to the structure of the argument
rather than to the content or subject matter. Describe the argument in your own
words (paraphrase) and try to match up the analogous parts of your paraphrased argument
to the answer choices.

Note: The LSAT purposely uses difficult language to disguise relatively simple arguments. Practice sufficiently so
that you can recognize the argument amidst the tricky language.

"""
Principle = """

These questions ask you to identify a rule, or principle, that supports the stimulus argument
presented. In some cases, you are required to choose an argument that conforms
to the stimulus principle.
Some example question stems are
1. The reasoning above most closely conforms to which one of the following
principles?
2. Which one of the following conforms most closely to the principle illustrated
above?
3. Which one of the following employee behaviors most clearly violates the company
policy outlined above?
4. Which one of the following illustrates a principle most similar to that illustrated
by the passage?

Strategies
The first step in answering these questions is to identify the rule or principle in the
stimulus argument. Then, select the answer choice that relies on the same rule or principle.
You should generally avoid any answer choices that include the same subject
matter as that of the stimulus argument; focus on the rule or principle, not on the
content.
"""
Point_of_Contention = """

These questions always involve a dialogue between two people who disagree about
something. You are expected to choose the answer that best describes the crux of the
disagreement.

Some sample question stems are
1. Todd’s and Andy’s positions indicate that they disagree about the truth of which
one of the following?
2. A point on which Randy and Salvatore’s views differ is whether
3. William and Max disagree over whether
4. The dialogue most supports the claim that Heather and Mike disagree about
whether

Strategies
Your first step is to understand, then succinctly summarize the first party’s argument.
Next, determine where the first and second parties differ in their statements.
Paraphrasing will help you get to the root of the argument and quickly locate the
correct answer.

"""
Role_of_Fact = """

Some of the questions ask about the role, or function, of a specific fact that is included
in the stimulus argument.

Some sample question stems are
1. The claim that taxes should increase in proportion to a person’s income plays
which one of the following roles in the argument?
2. The claim in the first sentence of the passage plays which one of the following
roles in the argument?
3. Joshua’s statement that “this claim simply cannot be proved” plays which one of
the following roles in his argument?
4. Which one of the following most accurately describes the role played in the
passage by the claim that fish have gills?

Strategies
To answer these questions correctly, you must determine the reason why the author
included this particular fact or detail. Most of the incorrect answer choices will either be
too narrow or too broad, or beyond the scope of the stimulus argument.
"""
Flaw = """

These questions ask you to identify an error of reasoning in the stimulus argument.
Some sample question stems are
1. Which one of the following, if true, identifies a flaw in the plan for the program?
2. The argument is vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that the argument
3. The reasoning above is questionable because it fails to exclude the
possibility that
4. The reasoning in the politician’s argument is flawed because this argument
5. Ralph’s reasoning in his response to Jessica is most vulnerable to criticism on the
grounds that it
6. Which one of the following is a questionable argumentative strategy employed
in the above argument?

Strategies
The question stem tells you that a problem exists with the logic of the argument. You
just have to choose the answer that describes the flaw. Most flawed arguments include
an unwarranted assumption; in other words, the argument is weakened by a missing link
between the stated evidence and the stated conclusion. The author of the argument is
taking something for granted that is not necessarily true.
"""
Paradox = """

A paradox arises when you are presented with two statements that are both true, yet
they appear to be mutually contradictory. The key words to help you spot paradox question
stems are “explain” and “reconcile.”
Some sample questions stems are
1. Which one of the following, if true, most helps to explain why the people
mentioned continued to grow beans?
2. Which one of the following, if true, most helps to explain the finding of the
caffeine study?
3. Which one of the following, if true, helps to reconcile the statements above?
4. Which one of the following, if true, does the most to reconcile the apparent
conflict in the system described above?

Strategies
The stimulus argument in paradox questions usually includes a term that either must be
redefined in order to resolve the paradox, or contains a misinterpretation of a term upon
which the author relies. You must recognize the contradiction that exists and look for an
answer choice that more clearly defines a critical term.
We often refer to the “bumblebee paradox” with our tutoring students. Current research
suggests that a bumblebee’s wings are aerodynamically unsound; as a result, a bumblebee
should not be able to fly. However, bumblebees do fly, so clearly the term “aerodynamically
unsound” is poorly defined.
"""
Parallel_Structure = """

These questions ask you to match up two arguments that share structural characteristics.
There are usually two parallel structure questions in each Logical Reasoning section. They
are usually in the second half of the section, and they can usually be recognized by their
length since each answer choice is a complete argument. Sometimes the stimulus argument
is flawed. In such a case, you must identify the answer choice argument that shares
the same flaw.

Some sample question stems are
1. Which one of the following arguments is most similar in its reasoning to the
argument above?
2. The flawed reasoning in which one of the following arguments most closely
resembles the flawed reasoning in the professor’s argument?
3. The reasoning in the argument above most closely parallels that in which one of
the following?
4. The flawed pattern of reasoning in the argument above is most similar to that in
which one of the following?
5. Which one of the following contains questionable reasoning most similar to that
in the argument above?
6. The pattern of reasoning in which of the following is most similar to that in the
mayor’s argument?

Strategies
One way to approach the parallel structure questions is to reason by analogy. In other
words, if you match up the analogous parts, the structure becomes clearer. The structure
of the argument is more important than the content or subject matter of the argument.
Do not be fooled by answer choices that refer to the same subject matter as that
presented in the stimulus argument. You are expected to see past the facts presented and
look at the relationship between the evidence and conclusion in the argument.
"""

concept_excerpts = {
    "Assumption": Assumption,
    "Weaken_Strengthen": Weaken_Strengthen,
    "Conclusion" : Conclusion,
    "Method_of_Argument" : Method_of_Argument, 
    "Principle" : Principle, 
    "Point_of_Contention" : Point_of_Contention,
    "Role_of_Fact" : Role_of_Fact, 
    "Flaw" : Flaw, 
    "Paradox" : Paradox, 
    "Parallel_Structure" : Parallel_Structure
}