Attacking Necessary Assumption Questions

[jasleenkchahal]

I've read multiple posts on necessary assumption questions and have drilled this question type often. I find that I'm still wasting too much time with these questions and sometimes STILL get them wrong. They are probably my biggest obstacle on LR right now!!!

My thought process when attacking NA questions is:
1) read the stimulus trying to find the conclusion and relevant premises --> core
2) look for term shifts
3) think veryyy briefly about a gap (if it doesn't come to me within a few seconds, I just move on to the answer choices)

... my problem is, I find that I'm focusing too much on looking for answer choices that have term shifts. When the answer choice doesn't involve a term shift, then I find myself going back and starting over - wasting way too much time. I know this is a better strategy for sufficient assumption questions, but don't know how to improve this strategy.

I hope my question makes sense. Any suggestions?

[tommywallach]

Just cut "term shift" out of your vocabulary. The rest is great:

Focus on core.
Think about gap.
Pick the answer that closes it.

Done.

-t

P.S. I mean, there are term shifts, but you can't stress overly about them. Focus on the meaning, not the language.

[chike_eze]

Generally, almost all necessary assumption questions I came across fit in one of these three categories:

1. New term: New term introduced in conclusion. Which means the author must be assuming that X in the premise is equivalent to Y in the conclusion.
Counter: show that X is not equal to Y

2. Alternate explanation: The author is assuming that there isn't a different explanation (conclusion) for the premise(s).
Counter: show alternate explanation for the premise(s)

3. Presence/Absence of premise: The author is assuming that the presence (or absence) of premise X leads to conclusion Y.
Counter: show that premise does not exist, if assumed to exist or show that premise exists, if assumed not to exist.

Note: These categories may account for 80-90% of necessary assumption questions. However, you will get those ridiculous questions where normal categories just won't do. E.g., see the Dioxin question: post11745.html?hilit=dioxin&sid=b3acb3ef04e0348fa44dd9f1b416da9c#p11745
(I still have nightmares about this one)

[stol1989]

From my experience on NA questions I can recommend this:

Stay flexible. Spot a gap but don't be preoccupied by thoughts about it. There could be numerous necessary assumptions and the most glaring one may not show up in answers.

If an argument looks like sinking ship with thousands holes in it, don't waste your time by trying to fix it in your head; jump to AC, eliminate and use negation test.