LSAT Weaken questions

[bullfrogwart]

I am struggling. I have been inserting the one answer choices, and if the conclusion does not follow, then that is the right answer. Someone please help

[ohthatpatrick]

Sorry for the delayed response.

I'm not sure where you got that approach to Weaken questions, but it sounds like you're interpreting the task to be, "Which of these answer choices would contradict the conclusion?"

Weaken is definitely NOT doing that (similarly, Strengthen answers will never PROVE the conclusion).

The correct answer to Weaken hurts the author's case in some way.
The correct answer to Strengthen helps the author's case in some way.

There's a lot of variety to how the correct answer can work:

1. Corroborate / Undermine a missing link in the author's logic
2. Rule out / Introduce some new objection / alternate explanation
3. Bolster / Undermine the credibility or relevance of the evidence.
4. Provide new info somewhat unrelated to argument core that supports / undermines Conclusion.

The vast majority of correct answers are #1 or #2, but now and then you see a #3 or #4.

Some correct answers have a big effect. Some have very little effect.
If more than one answer Weakens, we want the STRONGER answer.
If only one answer Weakens, then it's correct, even if it barely weakens.

Some people like the metaphor of football:
Picture the author's conclusion as one endzone "Guilty", and the opposing counsel's conclusion as the opposite endzone "Not Guilty".

As the author introduces premises, she brings us from the 50 yard line (a state of ignorance/doubt) towards her endzone. But she doesn't bring us all the way; if she had already proven her conclusion (scored the touchdown), then LSAT wouldn't be able to ask a Weaken/Strengthen question.

Some correct answers feel like a 1 yard loss ... others feel like a 20 yard loss, or that they bring us all the way back to midfield, or that they almost score a touchdown for the Opposing Counsel's conclusion.

The magnitude doesn't matter ... if it moves us towards the author's conclusion is Strengthens. If it moves us away or neutralizes the gains she had made with her premises, then it Weakens.

My suggestion:
1. Find the core
2. Flip the conclusion to turn yourself into Opposing Counsel (if the author concludes "This proposal is pointless", you assign yourself the goal of arguing "This proposal is NOT pointless: it has at least some value")
3. Think about how you, as that lawyer for Opposing Counsel, would respond to the author's evidence. How can you neutralize the effect of the author's evidence or how can you outweigh it with other considerations.

Hope this helps.

[bullfrogwart]

not really, but will see.