Critical Reasoning for Beginners

I have not used any notes for the CR's
I did read the question first and then the stem and also tried to answer the question without reading answer choices but not the T-thing.

Hope this helps. On the other hand, these guys are pro's, so they know what they are doing and I would not deviate...

Thanks bb. You meant you did not take any notes while doing the CR questions?
May I ask which book you used to prepare for CR?

p.s. What are some other CR guru's comment? :D

Bump.

Anyone who used MGMAT CR can comment further on the usage of T-Diagram? Whether ppl succeed in using it on the exam... etc.

I just tried to employ the technique with their online Question Bank. Seems like I need an avg of little more than 2 min per CR question.

Thank you so much for the analysis...

presentation helped. thanks a lot!

Thanks

Thanks for this.

I just started my CR preparation today. Completed reading Kaplan premier , but still not very clear. I am reading this ppt in detail now - clear and good examples.

Hi,

I just started with my GMAT prep this week and am currently studying CR from Kaplan Premier. I also read the ppt posted in this thread and tried working on the example questions.However, I am getting more than 75% questions ( even simpler ones) incorrect . It is my Day 4 of preparation and it is obvious that CR is an area of weakness for me.

Basically, I feel I am just not getting the gist of GMAT reasoning. My reasoning is going in all wrong directions

Please suggest where I can find some practice questions for CR that have detailed explainations that would help me.

I would recommend that you get MGMAT CR or PowerScore CR - those are the best. Don't jump into questions; instead focus on the theory, approaches, and strategy. Answering questions on your own first, without reading through the answer choices is what helped me the most...

thanks a lot.. very helpful post

Thanks so much for such a valuable post! I'm amazed by the amount of info you have collected!

Kudos, THanks. Just downloaded

Great post! Thanks!

I have a quibble with example 2, though, which reads:

All men are idiots
Tom is an idiot
Therefore Tom is a man; this conclusion is perfectly fine and acceptable in GMAT. But, when we see carefully this same stimulus can be logically valid without being factually correct
Image
B: Set of all idiots
A: Set of all men (contained in B)
C: Tom (can fall outside A) . . . so, you see that TOM could be a man or could not be a man; irrespective for purpose of CR in GMAT, the conclusion 'Tom is a man', is perfectly acceptable
-------------------
It seems to me that the premise that all men are idiots does not imply that no women are idiots, thus the argument would be fallacious as written. Tom may still be a man or a woman. To correct, the order of the first two nouns in the first premise should be switched.

All idiots are men.
Tom is a idiot.
Therefore Tom is a man.

Hey Kyle,

You're absolutely right. That is NOT at all acceptable on the GMAT. If anything, that seems like a perfect trap answer, because of a lack of understanding of the sets. Perhaps he meant to write:

All men are idiots.
Tom is a man.
Therefore Tom is an idiot.

But then there's no hole in the argument. Hmm. Odd.

-t

Thanks! Your presentation has helped to a great extent.

Thank you for sharing. Kudos to your post

Cheers!
Ravi

hi guys,..
very nice post,..thanks for this