Chapter 7

Advanced Strategies for Critical Reasoning

Learning Objectives

After studying this chapter, you will be able to: 

• Recognize the argument structures of causation and representation and apply appropriate reasoning to answer questions about such arguments
• Recognize conclusions that are plans, proposals, or predictions and apply appropriate reasoning to answer questions about arguments with these conclusions

In Chapter 6, you learned about the standard Critical Reasoning question types on the GMAT. Recognizing these questions, which the test maker asks over and over very predictably, enables you to read strategically—that is, to read for the details that make the difference between right and wrong answers. But the arguments in CR stimuli follow patterns as well. Recognizing common argument structures will allow you to analyze stimuli and predict correct answers more efficiently.

These advanced techniques are no substitute for knowing how to identify the conclusion, evidence, and assumptions in arguments—the ability to break down arguments into their component parts remains essential—but the three special cases we are about to discuss can help you zero in on the author’s central assumption with speed and accuracy. When you understand the kind of argument an author is making, you can anticipate what kind of assumptions he or she is likely to make.

The three special cases are Causality; Representativeness; and Plans, Proposals, and Predictions. Causality and Representativeness are classic argument structures, and Plans, Proposals, and Predictions are classic argument conclusions that function in predictable ways.

Let’s begin by discussing how to identify a causal argument and use that knowledge to your advantage on Critical Reasoning questions.