Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 34.3K All Categories
- 28.9K LSAT
- 17.4K General
- 5.3K Logical Reasoning
- 1.4K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 72 Podcasts
- 193 Webinars
- 14 Scholarships
- 193 Test Center Reviews
- 2.4K Study Groups
- 119 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.6K Specific LSAT Dates
- 38 November 2024 LSAT
- 18 October 2024 LSAT
- 10 September 2024 LSAT
- 41 August 2024 LSAT
- 30 June 2024 LSAT
- 5 April 2024 LSAT
- 11 February 2024 LSAT
- 23 January 2024 LSAT
- 38 November 2023 LSAT
- 43 October 2023 LSAT
- 14 September 2023 LSAT
- 38 August 2023 LSAT
- 27 June 2023 LSAT
- 30 Sage Advice
- 5.1K Not LSAT
- 4.1K Law School Admissions
- 13 Law School Explained
- 10 Forum Rules
- 676 Technical Problems
- 291 Off-topic
Super Basic Question about Reasoning
mattwhitworth56
Member
Hi everyone,
I'm really struggling with parallel, parallel flaw, and weakening arguments. It started out as my strongest areas but has plummeted as I am actually trying to figure out the methods and not base it on intuition. Doesn't nearly every single argument have a flaw? Like with an analogy I can always just say "relationship between X and Y isn't similar enough to Y and Z to be compared". It's just so frustrating that the test makers are setting the parameters for whether I'm looking for a flaw or saying some absolutely bizarre, nonsensical, but technically sound (?) argument is actually one that I'm looking for a parallel for. Thank you so much for taking the time to help!
- Matt