Method(Argument) - Pattern

Have a general idea of the argument structure

Find the answer by process of elimination

 

Strengthening by Providing Additional Premises

PT36 S3 Q10

 

New standard

PT17 S2 Q4 (E)

PT27 S4 Q12 (A)

PT36 S3 Q24 (evidence reinterpretation)

 

Confining Scope

PT19 S4 Q25 (B)

PT27 S4 Q21 (D)

PT54 S2 Q10 (B)

 

Undermining a Premise

PT21 S2 Q12 (B)

PT25 S4 Q21 (C)

PTA S1 Q7

PT58 S1 Q26 (A)

 

Questioning the Assumption

PT17 S3 Q10 (D) POE

PT20 S1 Q25 (D)

PT23 S2 Q15 (D)

PT30 S3 Q16

PT35 S4 Q25 (A)

PT41 S3 Q12 (B)

PT58 S4 Q12 (A)

 

Counter-example

PT19 S2 Q8 (C)

PT22 S2 Q11 (E)

PT26 S3 Q2 (B)

PT29 S1 Q2 (A)

PT29 S1 Q12 (D)

PT36 S1 Q1

PT81 S3 Q21 (C)

 

Fails to consider

PT22 S2 Q13 (C)

PT22 S4 Q23 (B)

PT23 S2 Q3 (E)

PT34 S3 Q8 (B) (Unintended Consequences)

PT40 S3 Q13

PT21 S3 Q14 (D) (Unintended Consequences)

PT25 S4 Q19 (A) (Unintended Consequences)

PT28 S3 Q7 (C)

PTB S4 Q20 (Forgot to consider)

PT39 S4 Q3 (E)

PT46 S3 Q10 (C)

 

Same conclusion, but for different reasons/premises

PT17 S3 Q4 (D)

PT18 S4 Q21 (E)

 

Citing new evidence to draw an alternative conclusion

PTA S1 Q13

 

Alternative Solution

PT35 S1 Q5 (E)

 

Correlation -> Causation

PT71 S1 Q9 (A)

 

Causation

 

PT24 S3 Q17 (A) (A cause B. Not A, so Not B).

PT36 S1 Q7 (Alt. explanation)

PT46 S2 Q17 (E) (Causation not established).

PT47 S1 Q10 (Alt. explanation)

 

Alternative Explanation

PT18 S2 Q1 (D)

PT23 S2 Q1 (C)

PT32 S4 Q1 (B) (alternative explanation)

PT33 S3 Q12 (A)

PT40 S1 Q4

PT71 S1 Q2 (D)

 

Suggesting another premise that weakens the link between the premise and the conclusion

PT19 S2 Q6 (B)

 

Misapplication/Misinterpretation

PT36 S3 Q8

 

Pointing out misinterpretation of the evidence by the opponent/putting things into perspective

PT17 S2 Q25 (D)

PT19 S4 Q2 (A)

 

Pointing out that the premise does not support the conclusion

PT41 S3 Q9 (C)

 

Eliminating Alternative Explanation

PTA S4 Q21

PT20 S1 Q8 (B)

 

Misleading/Misrepresenting Facts

PT34 S2 Q8 (A)

 

Dilemma

PT21 S2 Q9 (E)

 

Appeal to Authority

PT21 S3 Q20 (D) (variation)

PT26 S3 Q16 (D)

 

Appeal to a General Principle

PT21 S2 Q24 (A)

PT32 S1 Q8 (A)

 

Analogy

PT18 S2 Q12 (D)

PT19 S2 Q11 (B)

PT22 S2 Q3 (D)

PT27 S1 Q6 (C)

PT30 S2 Q7 (D)

PT33 S1 Q2 (A)

PT39 S2 Q4 (C)

PT39 S4 Q8 (D)

PT40 S1 Q2

PT54 S4 S2 (D)

PT59 S3 Q14 (C)

PT77 S2 Q17 (B)

 

Line of Reasoning leads to Absurdity/Not intended Consequences

PT18 S2 Q7 (B)

PT19 S4 Q18 (C)

PT20 S1 Q21 (A)

PT20 S4 Q4 (A)

PT31 S3 Q20 (A)

PT41 S1 Q3 (C), Variation

 

Methodology Error

PT35 S1 Q11 (E)

 

Questioning the Definition

PT23 S3 Q8 (B)

 

Reinterpreting/Offering New Definition

PT47 S3 Q20

PT28 S1 Q7 (E) (Evidence reinterpreting)

 

Appeal to Definition

PT59 S3 Q23 (B)

 

Eliminating other possibilities

PT24 S2 Q3 (B)

PTA S1 Q14

 

# vs. %

PT27 S1 Q15 (A)

 

Sufficiency vs. Necessity

PT28 S3 Q10 (A)

 

Straw man/Distortion

PT24 S3 Q3 (D)

 

General Pattern

PTA S1 Q18

 

Weakens it by discrediting the evidence cited to support the conclusion

PTA S4 Q5

 

Bringing in other contexts

PTB S1 Q13 (B)

PT55 S1 Q3 (C)

 

Distinguishing a category of person for whom the reason presented in favor of a given course of action is more telling than the reasons cited against that course of action

PT17 S2 Q18 (D)

 

Specific Cases to General Principle (Induction)

PT53 S3 Q24 (A)

 

Conditional Statement Triggering/Not-Triggering

PT65 S4 Q16 (A)

 

POE

PT20 S1 Q21

PT21 S2 Q24

Except

PT18 S2 Q5 (D)

 

Chain Conditional Statement, Contrapositive triggering, with a flaw in it. Describing the logical structure.

PT68 S3 Q20 (D)