Thursdays with Ron-CR query

[supratim7]

Hi Ron.

I have been watching/studying TWR session archives... great stuff.

"Real-world logic" vs. "Formal logic" theory in CR is a game changer (at least for me).

A) As you have suggested, I have classified following CR types. Hope they are OK.

Assumption: Formal logic
Must be true: Formal logic
Strengthen : Real-world Logic
Weaken: Real-world Logic

B) Could you help classify following 3

Evaluate Argument
Flaw in Reasoning
Resolve Paradox

Many thanks | Supratim

[RonPurewal]

well, the most important thing is that you should try not to need classifications in the first place.

i.e., any "categories" in CR should only be a backup plan.
you should find that you can solve many CR problems by just reading the question, understanding it, and then answering it.
i mean, think of what would happen if someone asked you a "resolve the paradox" question at work. let's say you sell some product, and your boss asks you, "Hey, so we put this product on sale, but we're still selling fewer units per week than we did when it was listed at full price. What do you think is going on there?"
--> obviously, you would not think to yourself, Oh my gosh, a "resolve the paradox" question! and then frantically search your mind for "rules" to help you solve the problem. instead, you would just hear your boss's words, think for a few moments about what he/she is asking, and then do your best to answer the question.
for the most part, you should be able to do the same thing on GMAT CR. you shouldn't think of anything in terms of "categories" unless you are lost or confused.

in fact, this is the entire point of the CR section: it's not intended to require very much studying. it's basically a series of questions that require precise thinking -- but not any factual knowledge beyond what everyday people know.

--

[RonPurewal]

in any case...
"evaluate argument" involves exactly the same kind of reasoning as "strengthen" or "weaken". (in fact, if you are watching the thursdays archives, you'll notice that these topics are treated together.)

a "flaw in reasoning" is ... well, it's exactly what it sounds like. there's no specialized knowledge here! if you are thinking that "flaw in reasoning" is some special "vocabulary word" that you have to memorize for the test, then CR is not going to be much fun for you.
in any case, a "flaw in reasoning" is just something that's wrong with the reasoning.
e.g., here's an argument
Chris has started eating more food than ever before. Therefore, Chris will gain weight.
One flaw in the reasoning: The author hasn't considered whether Chris is exercising more.
etc.
so it's basically the same line of thinking as "weaken", except you're just pointing out the things you could weaken, rather than actually finding things that weaken them.

"resolve the paradox" is the same kind of reasoning, too. for instance, it's easy enough to convert the above into a "resolve the paradox" problem:
Chris has started eating more food than ever before. However, Chris is not gaining any weight.
one way to "resolve this paradox" is to think about exercise again, just as in the previous example.

[supratim7]

Thank you for the prompt reply Ron

--> obviously, you would not think to yourself, Oh my gosh, a "resolve the paradox" question! and then frantically search your mind for "rules" to help you solve the problem.

LMAO...

the entire point of the CR section: it's not intended to require very much studying. it's basically a series of questions that require precise thinking

Totally agree. However, I did notice lots of improvement when I re-oriented my analysis/mind-work (to Real-world VS Formal). "game changer" wasn't an exaggeration.

Noted your recommendation/examples regarding Evaluate Argument, Flaw in Reasoning, and Resolve Paradox.

Wish I could attend your sessions live; for 7:00 PM EDT, I would need wake up at 3:30 AM IST :)

[RonPurewal]

I did notice lots of improvement when I re-oriented my analysis/mind-work (to Real-world VS Formal). "game changer" wasn't an exaggeration.

thanks for taking the time to write this. seriously.

i know that most readers of this forum are probably just looking for "answers", rather than a fundamental overhaul of their whole way of thinking about the test ... but, when one comes along who's really willing to imbibe this stuff, it's a very satisfying experience.

Wish I could attend your sessions live; for 7:00 PM EDT, I would need wake up at 3:30 AM IST :)

wrongo.
7:00pm EDT is 4:30am IST.
and, once the clocks are rolled back (usually around the beginning of november, check the internet to be sure), you'll have 7:00pm EST = 5:30am IST.
which is still insanely early, but ... not as insanely early.

[supratim7]

thanks for taking the time to write this. seriously.

i know that most readers of this forum are probably just looking for "answers", rather than a fundamental overhaul of their whole way of thinking about the test ... but, when one comes along who's really willing to imbibe this stuff, it's a very satisfying experience.

Not at all. I try to imbibe these "fundamentals" more than the I do the "answers". (as you say,) A particular question or answer wont be served in the test but the fundamentals shall set us free :) Totally appreciate such insights.

wrongo.
7:00pm EDT is 4:30am IST.
and, once the clocks are rolled back (usually around the beginning of november, check the internet to be sure), you'll have 7:00pm EST = 5:30am IST.
which is still insanely early, but ... not as insanely early.

That's right. However, "for 7:00 PM EDT, I would need wake up at 3:30 AM IST" doesn't imply "7:00pm EDT is 3:30am IST." Sir, you missed the "I would need wake up at" part :) (after all, we all have stuffs to do before we start our day) Live would be fab no doubt. Your sessions, however, are so thorough, that recordings do the job really well.

[RonPurewal]

Not at all. I try to imbibe these "fundamentals" more than the I do the "answers". (as you say,) A particular question or answer wont be served in the test but the fundamentals shall set us free :) Totally appreciate such insights.

cool. this is the right kind of mentality.

That's right. However, "for 7:00 PM EDT, I would need wake up at 3:30 AM IST" doesn't imply "7:00pm EDT is 3:30am IST." Sir, you missed the "I would need wake up at" part :)

lol.
the idea that anyone would wake up even 1 minute earlier than absolutely necessary is just ... not a thing, in my world.

(after all, we all have stuffs to do before we start our day)

... yeah, but the thursdays sessions are on the internet, and there's no camera... so you could always do everything (except maybe take a shower) while you're watching the session.

in any case, this thread is starting to get rather off-topic, so i'll quit now.