Argument structure
57 flashcards covering Argument structure for the LSAT Logical Reasoning section.
Argument structure is the foundational framework of logical reasoning, where an argument consists of premises—statements that provide evidence or support—and a conclusion that the premises aim to prove. Think of it as a building: the premises are the bricks, and the conclusion is the roof they hold up. Understanding this structure helps you evaluate whether an argument is sound, spot weaknesses, and construct your own logical cases, which is essential for critical thinking in law and beyond.
On the LSAT, argument structure appears frequently in Logical Reasoning questions, such as those asking you to strengthen, weaken, or identify flaws in arguments. Common traps include overlooking unstated assumptions or mistaking correlation for causation, which can lead to incorrect answers. Focus on carefully mapping out the premises, conclusion, and any gaps between them to analyze how the argument holds together. A key skill is practicing with real sample questions to build accuracy.
One concrete tip: Always underline the conclusion first to anchor your analysis.
Terms (57)
- 01
Premise
A premise is a statement that provides support or evidence for the conclusion in an argument.
- 02
Conclusion
The conclusion is the main claim or point that the argument is trying to prove, often indicated by words like 'therefore' or 'thus'.
- 03
Assumption
An assumption is an unstated belief that the argument relies on to connect the premises to the conclusion.
- 04
Hidden Assumption
A hidden assumption is an implicit belief in the argument that is not directly stated but is necessary for the reasoning to hold.
- 05
Sufficient Assumption
A sufficient assumption is one that, if true, would fully bridge the gap between the premises and the conclusion, making the argument valid.
- 06
Necessary Assumption
A necessary assumption is one that must be true for the argument to hold; without it, the conclusion does not follow from the premises.
- 07
Flaw
A flaw is a weakness in the argument's reasoning, such as a logical error or unsupported leap, that undermines its validity.
- 08
Logical Gap
A logical gap is a missing link in the argument where the premises do not adequately support the conclusion.
- 09
Evidence
Evidence consists of facts or data presented in the argument to support the premises or conclusion.
- 10
Inference
An inference is a conclusion drawn from evidence or premises, often requiring logical reasoning to connect the dots.
- 11
Deductive Argument
A deductive argument is one where the conclusion logically follows from the premises, if the premises are true.
- 12
Inductive Argument
An inductive argument is one that draws a general conclusion from specific evidence, but the conclusion is probable rather than certain.
- 13
Analogy
An analogy in an argument compares two similar situations to support a claim, but it can be flawed if the similarities are not relevant.
- 14
Causal Argument
A causal argument claims that one event causes another, often based on evidence of correlation, but it may overlook other factors.
- 15
Conditional Statement
A conditional statement expresses a relationship where if one condition is met, another must follow, such as 'If A, then B'.
- 16
Necessary Condition
A necessary condition is something that must be true for an outcome to occur, but it alone may not guarantee it.
- 17
Sufficient Condition
A sufficient condition is something that, if true, guarantees the outcome, though other paths to the outcome may exist.
- 18
Contraposition
Contraposition is the logical reversal of a conditional statement, such as changing 'If A, then B' to 'If not B, then not A', which preserves the truth.
- 19
Strengthen the Argument
To strengthen an argument means to provide information that makes the conclusion more likely to be true by supporting assumptions or evidence.
- 20
Weaken the Argument
To weaken an argument means to introduce information that undermines the reasoning, such as contradicting assumptions or evidence.
- 21
Principle
A principle is a general rule or standard that can be applied to the argument to evaluate its validity or resolve issues.
- 22
Role of a Statement
The role of a statement in an argument refers to its function, such as providing evidence, stating the conclusion, or acting as a counterpoint.
- 23
Main Point
The main point is the central thesis or conclusion of the argument that all other elements are intended to support.
- 24
Supporting Evidence
Supporting evidence is the specific facts or examples in the argument that back up the premises or conclusion.
- 25
Counterexample
A counterexample is an instance that disproves a general claim in the argument by showing an exception to the rule.
- 26
Circular Reasoning
Circular reasoning occurs when the argument assumes its own conclusion as a premise, making it logically invalid.
- 27
Ad Hominem
Ad hominem is a flaw where the argument attacks the person making the claim rather than addressing the substance of the argument.
- 28
Straw Man
A straw man flaw involves misrepresenting an opponent's argument to make it easier to attack, rather than engaging with the actual position.
- 29
Hasty Generalization
Hasty generalization is a flaw where a conclusion is drawn from insufficient evidence, such as a small sample size.
- 30
Appeal to Authority
An appeal to authority flaw relies on an expert's opinion without sufficient evidence, especially if the authority is not relevant.
- 31
False Dilemma
A false dilemma presents only two options when more exist, forcing a choice that oversimplifies the argument.
- 32
Slippery Slope
A slippery slope flaw assumes that a small initial step will lead to a series of extreme consequences without evidence.
- 33
Begging the Question
Begging the question is a flaw where the premise essentially restates the conclusion, assuming what needs to be proven.
- 34
Post Hoc Fallacy
The post hoc fallacy assumes that because one event followed another, the first caused the second, without proving causation.
- 35
Argument from Ignorance
Argument from ignorance claims something is true because it has not been proven false, or vice versa, which is a logical flaw.
- 36
Diagramming an Argument
Diagramming an argument involves mapping out its structure, such as labeling premises and conclusions, to clarify the reasoning.
- 37
Identifying the Conclusion
Identifying the conclusion requires recognizing key indicator words and ensuring it is the statement the argument aims to prove.
- 38
Evaluating Assumptions
Evaluating assumptions means checking for unstated beliefs in the argument and determining if they are reasonable or vulnerable.
- 39
Flawed Generalization
A flawed generalization draws a broad conclusion from unrepresentative or limited evidence, weakening the argument's reliability.
- 40
Sampling Error
Sampling error occurs when an argument bases a conclusion on a sample that does not accurately represent the whole population.
- 41
Correlation vs. Causation
Correlation vs. causation is a common flaw where an argument mistakes a relationship between events for one causing the other.
- 42
Parallel Reasoning
Parallel reasoning involves identifying arguments with similar structures to the one in question, often for analogy or flaw detection.
- 43
Paradox Resolution
Paradox resolution requires finding an explanation that reconciles seemingly contradictory elements in an argument.
- 44
Method of Reasoning
Method of reasoning describes the logical approach used in the argument, such as analogy or causation, to reach the conclusion.
- 45
Boldface Questions
Boldface questions ask about the roles of specifically highlighted statements in the argument, such as premise or conclusion.
- 46
Point at Issue
A point at issue is the specific disagreement between two speakers in an argument, often requiring identification of the core conflict.
- 47
Resolve the Paradox
To resolve the paradox means to provide information that explains an apparent contradiction in the argument's elements.
- 48
Scope Shift
A scope shift flaw occurs when the argument changes the range or context of its claims without justification, leading to inconsistency.
- 49
Equivocation
Equivocation is a flaw where a word is used with different meanings in the same argument, causing confusion in the reasoning.
- 50
Red Herring
A red herring introduces an irrelevant topic to distract from the main argument, diverting attention from the core issue.
- 51
Inconsistency
Inconsistency in an argument means contradictory statements within it, which undermine the overall logic.
- 52
Overgeneralization
Overgeneralization is a flaw where the argument applies a rule too broadly without sufficient evidence for all cases.
- 53
Understatement
Understatement in an argument downplays significant evidence or implications, potentially weakening the conclusion.
- 54
Exaggeration
Exaggeration involves overstating evidence or claims in the argument, which can make it vulnerable to criticism.
- 55
Faulty Analogy
A faulty analogy compares dissimilar things in a way that doesn't hold, thus failing to support the argument's point.
- 56
Questionable Cause
Questionable cause is a flaw where the argument attributes causation without ruling out alternative explanations.
- 57
Alternative Explanation
An alternative explanation offers a different reason for the evidence presented, potentially weakening the argument's conclusion.