Question type

[liu1993918]

The question stem is quoted below:
"The vicious cycle described above could not result unless which of the following were true?"

Dear instructors, is this question a Find the Assumption question?
I thought it is a Find the Assumption, because it seems that the answer must be true in order to make this argument valid.
Thanks in advance.

[RonPurewal]

i guess you could construe the question that way ... if there's an argument whose point is "the vicious cycle will happen".

but, why bother with classifying the question? i don't really see the point.
the literal words of the question are (in my opinion) not difficult to understand. so, it seems that the optimal path is just "read the question, think about it, and answer it", rather than having to take unnecessary detours through "classification".

[RonPurewal]

analogy:
let's say you've entered a business-plan competition, and someone asks you "What are the minimum resources necessary for your plan to succeed?"

i'd bet very good money that you wouldn't try to "classify" the question ("Oh hey, that's an assumption-type question"). you wouldn't even think of trying to do that.
you'd just hear the question, think about it, and answer it directly.

you should try to do the same here, whenever possible. it's always better to be specific than to be vague!

[liu1993918]

but, why bother with classifying the question? i don't really see the point.

Thanks for replying me.
I can understand your reasoning. However, I still have some doubts. I have 5th edition of CR guide. The 1st step it told me to do is to identify the question type, so you know how to process this question. That's the reason why I want to classify this question in the 1st place.
Thus, I am quite confused now.
Can you explain this further to me, please?

[RonPurewal]

the first thing you should try to do is, basically, just read the question and try to answer it--the same way you would in an interview, or in a court trial, or ... well, pretty much anywhere.

if you already understand exactly what the question is asking, then "classifying" cannot possibly help (you already understand exactly what you want to find!), and can very possibly make things worse (because the "classification" is going to be much more vague than the actual question).

[RonPurewal]

example: ron is going on a diet, in an effort to lose body fat.

consider the following two questions:

1/
Which of the following, if true, supports the idea that Ron's plan will achieve the stated goal?

2/
Which of the following, if true, supports the idea that Ron will achieve the stated goal?

these questions are quite different.
• to answer the first question correctly, you need additional evidence that the diet will help ron lose body fat.
• anything that will help ron lose body fat, even if unrelated to the diet, can be a correct answer to the second question.

e.g., "ron is going to perform more interval workouts, which promote body fat loss, while on the diet"
--> irrelevant to question #1
--> correctly addresses question #2.

[RonPurewal]

the point is that, if the questions above were two conversations, you would definitely understand the difference between them, and you wouldn't have to worry about "classifying" them.

on the other hand, they would both be "classified" into the same category ("strengthen"). so, you can see why that isn't as good.

[RonPurewal]

...so your first plan should be to try to mentally transform the words into real-life ideas. if you can do that, you can just answer the question.

as for what the book says, there are two reasons why the book says that stuff:

1/
a book can't explain human intuition ("make it real life"). in other words, you can't make "rules" for ordinary conversations.
a book is limited to things that can be described in a book.

2/
for students who tend to stress out over this exam, it can help to have a plan--because, otherwise, those kinds of students are very likely to "freeze up" and do nothing at all!
... same reason why people do "fire drills" at schools and workplaces. people aren't going to be able to think if an actual fire is raging through the building... so it's essential to have a plan.

[liu1993918]

...so your first plan should be to try to mentally transform the words into real-life ideas. if you can do that, you can just answer the question.

Thanks for your excellent explanation.
However, I don't quite understand how to transform the words into real-life ideas.
Can you explain it further to me, please?

[tim]

Transforming words into real life ideas is what reading is all about. Think about what you do when you read - hopefully you don't just leave the words on the page as words on the page, because if so you are totally missing out on the meaning of what you're reading! Your mind should create images (even if they're only abstract) about the information on the page when you read the words. This is the difference between reading and "reading" - I can read English, but I can only "read" Danish. In other words, when I read English, I get a mental image of what's happening (transforming the words into real life ideas), but when I "read" Danish, I'm just pronouncing words on the page that don't transform into real life ideas in my mind.

[RonPurewal]

...so your first plan should be to try to mentally transform the words into real-life ideas. if you can do that, you can just answer the question.

Thanks for your excellent explanation.
However, I don't quite understand how to transform the words into real-life ideas.
Can you explain it further to me, please?

what i mean is that you should try to personalize the situation. i.e., put yourself into the situation, and think about it.

if that's not possible-- e.g., if the passage is about some scientific thing, or about aggregate statistics, or anything else that doesn't involve individuals-- then try to imagine a conversation about the topic. (it helps if you're nerdy enough to actually talk about these sorts of things from time to time.)

[RonPurewal]

as an example of "personalizing the situation", consider #111 in OG 13th/2015 (can't reproduce here).

ultimately, the claim boils down to the actions of the potential prank callers (they're the ones whose actions directly determine whether the plan will succeed or fail).
so, if you put yourself into the shoes of a potential prank caller, it's MUCH easier to understand the significance of each statement.

e.g., the most important word in the first statement is "anonymously".
if you're reading that sentence "objectively", with no particular point of view, then it's impossible to determine the importance of that word. (if the context were different, the relative importance of the words could change-- e.g., if the same sentence appeared in a passage about whether drivers are able to stop and report roadside fires, then "anonymously" wouldn't matter much, but "street corner" would be crucial.)

but, if you make yourself a potential prank caller, you'll wonder, "why would i go all the way out to the street to do this?" and BAM there's your answer: it's anonymous.

[RonPurewal]

^^ also, as a potential prank caller, you will much more easily understand the deterrent effect implied by the correct answer.