Argument Evaluation Flashcards
7 cards from real LNAT practice questions. Tap to flip, then mark Knew It or Still Learning — missed cards come back until you master them.
Read the first 7 Argument Evaluation flashcards as text
A columnist claims: 'Since the unemployment rate fell after tax cuts were introduced, tax cuts reduce unemployment.' Which additional piece of evidence would most strengthen this causal claim?
Answer: Countries that did not cut taxes saw unemployment rise during the same period
A control comparison showing divergent outcomes for non-treatment cases strengthens the causal inference.
Which of the following is a necessary condition for an inductive argument to be considered strong?
Answer: The premises must make the conclusion more likely to be true
A strong inductive argument is one where the premises make the conclusion probable, not certain.
An editorial argues: 'We must act on climate change now. Anyone who disagrees is in the pay of fossil fuel companies.' This is an example of:
Answer: Poisoning the well / ad hominem
Dismissing all opposition by impugning their motives rather than addressing their arguments is poisoning the well.
Which of the following best describes the role of a 'counter-example' in evaluating a universal claim?
Answer: A single counter-example is sufficient to disprove a universal claim
Logic dictates that one genuine exception falsifies a claim of the form 'All X are Y.'
A passage argues that renewable energy cannot replace fossil fuels because the wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't always shine. Which response most effectively rebuts this?
Answer: Storage technology and grid diversification can compensate for intermittency, making continuous supply feasible
Directly addressing the intermittency problem by citing technological solutions undermines the core premise of the argument.
In the context of the LNAT, which of the following best characterises a 'principle' in an argument?
Answer: A general rule or value that, if accepted, supports the conclusion in the specific case
A principle is a broad normative or logical rule that bridges general values to specific conclusions.
Which of the following most accurately describes the difference between 'weakening' and 'undermining' an argument?
Answer: Weakening reduces the probability of the conclusion; undermining attacks the structure or a key premise directly
Weakening makes the conclusion less likely, while undermining can destroy a premise or reveal a structural flaw.