Is there always a need to identify the assumption, and then

Question

Is there always a need to identify the assumption, and then strengthening it?

Or do we just focus on the conclusion and find something that directly strengthens the conclusion.

From MGMAT:
1. Fix a potential weakness of the conclusion OR
2. introduce additional supporting evidence.

For example, when doing weakening questions, it's critical to find the assumption and attack it.

I'm wondering if the same applies to strengthening questions, but we  support  it instead of  attack  it.

somerandomguy · Answer

Q1: No, I don't think you will always be able to find an assumption in an argument. There are too many possibilities. For example, I can say that I will get a burger from Inn-n-out today. There are many assumptions one can make (i.e. I have transportation to get there, Inn-n-out will still sell have burgers, I won't get hit by an asteroid, etc...).

Q2: Yes, for strengthen questions you would do the opposite and find information to support the argument.

Here is the approach I would take for strengthen/weaken questions:

ID conclusion and its supporting evidence
(1) ID the author's assumptions (if any). If present, prephrase something to prevent you from choosing a wrong answer choice. 
AND/OR 
(2) Add additional information to make the argument stronger/weaker.

Also, for strengthen/weaken questions the stronger claim is usually correct. You do not need to totally destroy an argument but merely strengthen/weaken it by 0.0000001%.

Consider the claim from Bobby, "eating lots of Halloween candy can cause cavities".

(a) Some people who eat lots of Halloween candy do not develop cavities. (this statement is still consistent with the claim that eating lots of candy can cause cavities) Eliminate - this claim does nothing to the argument.

(b) All people who eat lots of Halloween candy will eventually develop cavities. (This statement is right because it doesn't leave any gaping holes in the argument. When one eats candy, they will develop cavities)

HTH

amitdgr · Answer

Thanks

some random guy comes out of nowhere and helps :lol:

+1 for you

bigfernhead · Answer

That's a good post. I think that's where I've been beating myself up too much.

When I read the premise, i ALWAYS try to find the assumption, and I think this gets me in trouble because I over assume.

Do you guys read the question before jumping into the passage?

somerandomguy · Answer

It's relative. For myself, I've been instructed to read the question first. However, others think that reading the stimulus first allows them to be more critical of the information. To each, his own!

Edited: For randomness....

Praetorian · Answer

I thought you may find some useful tips in these threads.

Useful Tips for CR
> https://www.gmatclub.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=14833

If X then Y, help for CR
> https://www.gmatclub.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=14547

CR- Bank Executives
> https://www.gmatclub.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=13782

Logical Fallacies - help on CR and AWA
> https://www.gmatclub.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=40345

bigfernhead · Answer

Awesome! Thanks!

Is there always a need to identify the assumption, and then

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards