Inference Questions
The process of inferring is considering one or more statements within a text stimulus as evidence, and drawing a solid conclusion from them.
It some situations the inference may be very similar to the author's overall main point. A valid inference is something that must be true if the statements in the passage are true - being an extension of the argument RATHER than a necessary part of it.
Take this for example, let's take on a more expanded version of the basketball team argument:
April plays basketball for Saint Marry High School, despite the rule against participation by non-students. Therefore, April must be over 6 feet tall.
Inference: April is not a student at Saint Marry High School
From here it can clearly be seen that if April plays basketball despite the team's rule against participation by non-students, she must not be a student. Otherwise, she wouldn't be playing despite the rule; she'd be playing in accordance with the rule. This inference though is not an essential assumption of the argument since the conclusion about April's height does not depend on it.
So then, be careful; unlike an assumption, an inference need not have anything to do with the author's conclusion - it may simply be a piece of information derived from one or more pieces of evidence. The Denial test works for inferences as well as they do for assumptions: a valid inference ALWAYS makes more sense than its counterpart. If you deny or negate an answer choice, and it has little or no effect on the argument, chances are that choice is not inferable from the passage.
Flaw Questions
This question type provokes the student to identify what is wrong with a particular argument. There are two basic types.
- General Type: The correct choice will critique the reasoning by pointing out that it contains a classic fallacy [example: "The argument attacks the source of an opinion, rather than the opinion itself"]. When this happens, the flaw falls into a general, well-defined category.
- Specific Type: The correct choice won't refer to a classic fallacy, but rather attack a specific piece of argument's reasoning [example: "It can't be concluded that the number of male dogs has increased simply because the percentage of male dogs has increased"].
Notice that the subject of the statement isn't dogs; it's the author's faulty reasoning about dogs. In the same way to many other question types, the required skill is the ability to identify the structure of the author's argument specifically, where the argument goes wrong.
0 Response to 'UMAT SECTION 1: UNDERSTANDING QUESTIONS PART THREE'
Post a Comment