bkw wrote:
> 1) Is this an Argument or not?
Agree on this, but if one become good at reading understanding stimuli maybe one will figure out whether it will contain a conclusion or not while reading it, no? I don't know maybe I am on deep water here. However, what I can imagine is that reading a steam first might confuse/mislead you in worst case. Again, I am unsure here and I need to try it out
> 2) Am I looking at the whole thing or just part of it?
Could you please clarify here?
If it is a argument, we look for: C + P
If it is a fact set, we look for facts: P only
So exactly what do you mean by whole thing or part above?
Maybe I am doing something weird always reading the whole stimuli, and it might also be another reason why I use to take 2-2.5minutes to answer a CR problem.
thanks a bunch!
First of all, you can't confuse yourself by reading the stem first. You don't read it carefully: you just look at it to say "Weakener" or "Strengthener" or "Inference," and then look at the prompt.
Secondly, part of efficiency (which means increasing both speed and accuracy) is, just as on RC questions or Math questions or SC questions, really
attacking the stimulus actively, looking for what you want. To read it actively, you want to be actively looking for the important point (the Conclusion). If you read the whole thing not knowing if there's even going to be a Conclusion, you can't have quite the same aggression towards the question and will generally not be as efficient, imo.
Finally, in terms of reading part/all of the stimulus, you'll almost always read all of it; however, I have seen questions like these (please forgive me, I'm not going to write a whole CR question here to confuse people):
"A spokesman for Company X has argued that their new product is good for (blahblahblah) reasons. However, opponents point out that the new product is actually bad. They draw attention to the (blahblahblah) reasons."
Which of the following would best strengthen the spokesman's position on Company X's new product?"
In this case, the Main Conclusion is the second sentence, the opinion of the opponents. However, the question isn't asking you about that! It's asking you to Strengthen the Spokesman's conclusion, which is the first sentence. As a result,
the correct prephrase for your answer would come entirely from the first sentence and would have to be linked to the spokesman's specific reasons (blahblahblah), which might have nothing at all to do with the opponent's given Evidence. Thus, reading the Question Stem first, in the case of questions like these, gives you vital information about where to look, and sometimes even directs you away from the main Conclusion of the Argument itself.
