For pattern 1, it’s always useful to challenge percentages against other base parameters. This is a common trap in CR where you’re made to compare percentages / absolute numbers and it creates a misleading sense of improvement. Always remember these numbers are relative, so don’t take them at face value until you’re sure they can stand on their own without external factors. Your job in these arguments is to first try to prove them wrong, and only if you can’t, consider that they may be valid. That’s why many experts emphasize elimination, pushing you to rule out options as aggressively as possible.
For pattern 2, as you mentioned, negation works in most cases. However, there will be some where negation leads to an indirect impact on the argument, which may not be obvious at first glance. These tend to be higher difficulty questions because connecting those indirect effects is not straightforward. It’s good to aim to get these right as well, but only after you’ve built strong consistency on easy and medium questions first.
AquaZinc
Hey everyone!
Just wanted to share two question types that keep getting confused on and hear what the community thinks.
Pattern 1 — The Inflation TrapCame across this argument:
"Education spending increased 30 percent overall during the last decade so we are spending enough on education."The correct weakener was that when adjusted for inflation, per pupil spending actually went DOWN. completely missed this on first attempt because the 30% increase sounded convincing. ask always— is this nominal or real data? Is this total or per capita?
Pattern 2 — The Hidden AssumptionAnother one that got me:
"Joe's Snack Shack hasn't been updated in 70 years. We plan to modernize it. Therefore it will become more popular."The hidden assumption is that the vintage and antique look is NOT what makes it popular currently. Once I learned the negation test this became much clearer but it took me a while to get there.