Reasoning questions—sometimes called Method of Reasoning—are concerned with how an argument does what it's doing.
Here are some ways you'll see them phrased:
- The argument proceeds by
- Mike responds to Jake's argument using which one of the following techniques?
- Which one of the following is a technique used in the argument?
Answer choices will address argumentative techniques, both good ones and bad ones.
While these questions are 100% predictable, they'll probably give you some grief early on in your studies. It can be tough for new students until you build up the vocabulary. But as you improve, these questions will become some of the easiest for you to tackle.
Let's look at some practice questions.
Examples
PrepTest 123, Section 2, Question 20
Gamba: Muñoz claims that the Southwest Hopeville Neighbors Association overwhelmingly opposes the new water system, citing this as evidence of citywide opposition. The association did pass a resolution opposing the new water system, but only 25 of 350 members voted, with 10 in favor of the system. Furthermore, the 15 opposing votes represent far less than 1 percent of Hopeville's population. One should not assume that so few votes represent the view of the majority of Hopeville's residents.
Let's break down Gamba's argument. Their conclusion: We shouldn't accept Muñoz's claim that the SHNA's vote represents citywide opposition to the new water system. Their evidence: We have a crummy sample of even the SHNA, much less the city at large—the 15 association members who voted against the water system represent less than 1% of the city population.
So what's the method, here? Gamba's casting doubt on whether the SHNA vote could represent citywide sentiment because of its sample size. That's our prediction. Lo and behold, answer choice E is a nearly verbatim match.
PrepTest 135, Section 4, Question 16
Let's try a comparative passage,
Critic to economist: In yet another of your bumbling forecasts, last year you predicted that this country's economy would soon go into recession if current economic policies were not changed. Instead, economic growth is even stronger this year.
Economist: There was nothing at all bumbling about my warning. Indeed, it convinced the country's leaders to change economic policies, which is what prevented a recession.
We're asked to determine how the economist responds to the critic.
The critic essentially says, "The economist's prediction that, if we didn't change policies, the economy would go into recession, was dumb."
The economist responds by saying, "We avoided the condition that would lead to recession by changing the policies thanks to my prediction."
In other words, the economist says we didn't meeting the sufficient condition I specified in the first place—which, in this case, is a good thing. That's the response and that's our prediction.
Note the awkward language in our correct answer choice:
[by] indicating that the state of affairs on which the economist's prediction was conditioned did not obtain
That's a convoluted way of saying we didn't meet the sufficient condition in the economist's original prediction. But that's what it means.
You'll see this sort of awkward language throughout the test. It's your responsibility to slow down and make sense of it, word by word.
---
That's it for Method of Reasoning questions. Next, we're tackling Role questions. See you there!