CRITICAL REASONING NOTE 1 Understanding Paragraph Structure: Basically, a paragraph is a set of sentences which, together, express an idea or an idea-set.

While there are the occasional exceptions, paragraph structure usually follows a certain thought pattern, depending on content and purpose. Content is not too difficult to determine - ask yourself "What is it the author is speaking of in the para, What is the situation being presented?" To determine purpose ask, "What is the author's objective in presenting this info or situation?" You'll find, then, that in many paragraphs the sequence in structure is as follows: 1. When the purpose is to explain something - the author would start with a line that presents a general approach to the idea, and progresses from that to a narrower or more specific reference. 2. When the purpose is to raise awareness - the author would first present information and detail that would then bring the issue or problem into focus. 3. When the purpose is to raise anxiety or concern - the author would focus on the issue or problem in a manner that raises the reader's concern, and would then present the feature of the issue that are the reasons for the concern or anxiety. 4. When the purpose is to present solutions - the author would first explain the issue or problem, and then move to the possible rectification or solutions. 5. When the purpose is to surprise, or amaze, or cause wonder - the statement of surprise would be presented first and would be followed by the features of the idea that would explain why the surprise. With this recognition, identifying the opening sentence (sometimes the closing sentence, sometimes the clear link between 2 sentences) becomes possible. Using these and a combination of recognition of thought flow, recognition of grammatical connectives used (pronouns, relative pronouns, demonstrative adjectives, conjunctions, prepositions) and simultaneous evaluation of choices for elimination, you should be able to arrive at the correct formation of the paragraph. Some words used in the paragraph serve as indicators: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) Introduction A, An, Nowadays, Beginning. Conclusion Clearly, Thus, Therefore, Eventually, Finally. Comparison Indicators Similarly, Likewise.. Contrast Indicators On the one hand, But, Yet, However, Nevertheless, Although.. Additional Information Indicators Also, Additionally Sequence Indicators Firstly, Secondly, Thirdly, Lastly Cause and Effect Due to, as, since.. Appositive Phrase used immediately after a comma or after a noun Eg. Savio is --------, he speaks a lot. (loquacious, talkative.)

9) Other words that direct or lead to the correct answer (You can misinterpret) Eg. It is ironical../ Paradoxically./ Surprisingly 10)Figures of speech If the sentence consists of any figures of speech like simile, metaphor etc. that meaning has to be incorporated into the overall interpretation of the sentence. Examples for: (a) Connotation Emotional aspect (Positive/ Negative tones) (eg. Slender/ skinny) (eg. Gourmet/ glutton) (b) Collocation The natural combination of words (eg. It is bitterly cold outside) {bitterly, terribly, badly, horribly} (eg. We say fast food, not quick food, not rapid food....) (eg. We make a speech or decision but we give a lecture) (c) Homonyms Words which have same spelling but different meanings (eg. Plant, plant) (eg. Industry, industry) (d) Homophones - Words which have similar sounds but different meanings (eg. Momentary, momentous) (e) Other confusable words (stationary, stationery); (eminent, immanent) etc. Try and use the following to remember more words: (a) Pneumonics (eg. VIBGYOR) (b) Use some aspect of the word to relate to Personal association......(eg. Titanic) (c) Interesting story behind the origin of words (etymology) (eg. Boycott, maverick, nylon.....) (d) RPS (Roots/ Prefixes/ Suffixes) (Cide to kill) (eg. Suicide, fratricide, patricide, famicide....) Understanding Critical Reasoning: Premises in an argument are the stated information/ideas that lead to a Conclusion. Assumptions are the unstated information/ideas that also contribute to the Conclusion. Inference means any understanding that can be derived from the Premises. Conclusion refers to the specific idea being presented through the argument, ie. (i) the particular inference (or understanding), or (ii) application of the inference. Look at the simple example below: Stimulus/ argument: J K Rowling has written the 7th Harry Potter book. It is going to be a bestseller. Question Stem: Which of the following, when added, would complete the logic of the argument? Answer Choices: 1) J K Rowling is an immensely popular author.

2) Harry Potter stories have gripped the imagination of readers the world over. 3) Her six earlier books in the series have all been bestsellers. 4) The seventh book in any series is usually a best seller. The word logic is used in the sense of when one or more true statements lead to a belief that can be considered representative of the truth. In the example above, choice 3 is the assumption that would complete the argument. It can be said that it is actually the very basis for the conclusion that the book would be a best seller. CR Questions often test your recognition of the significance of quantifiers and qualifiers. The words used in a conclusion should be considered with care, so that the statement is clearly understood. It may contain quantifiers (such as all, every, none, most, some, few, a few, always, never etc.). These words often enable you to evaluate whether the conclusion is representative of the truth (or not). It may contain qualifiers (such as all rivers that flow from west to east, no other coalition governmentetc). Such terms enable you to determine the limited truth of the conclusion. The types of Critical Reasoning Questions are as follows: (A) Construction/ Structure: (Question types like Conclusion, Assumption, Inference, Paradox or Contradiction, Logical Flaw, Summary of paragraph, Mark the statement as true or false, Point out the reason or premise). (B) Evaluation/ Formulation of a Plan : (Question types like Strengthening Argument, Weakening Argument, Logical Continuation or Paragraph Completion or Last sentence missing, Similar Reasoning or Parallel Reasoning). The usual features of flawed or illogical arguments are one or more of: 1) Irrelevant or wrong causes where the argument puts together pieces of information that are not relevant, or not related, or are wrongly interpreted. 2) Correlation-Causation X and Y may take place simultaneously (both are correlated) but this does not mean that X causes Y. This line of reasoning ignores the fact that another factor Z could have caused X or the reverse causation can be true, Y causes X. Correlation does not imply causation. 3) Wrong comparisons or analogies where the argument is built on the comparison of features that logically cannot be compared i.e. not comparing two similar things or using the wrong metric for measurement or using the wrong base for calculations. Eg. It is safer to fly a plane than to drive a motorbike since there are fewer airplane accidents than motor-bike accidents.

4) After this therefore because of this (Post Ergo Propter Hoc) This fallacy lies in concluding that since Y happened after X, X has caused Y. Assigning causation without any evidence other than the temporal sequence of events. Eg. 1) If you wash your car, it will rain - so washing your car causes rain. Eg. 2) Every month on the full moon, the number of crazy people in hospital emergency rooms goes up. And there are more arrests for fights. There must be a connection there. It must be the increased gravity of the moon or the bright light that makes people loony. 5) Hasty Generalizations without adequate basis (also known as sweeping statements) where a large conclusion is based on very scanty evidence or data. Eg. 1. My father smoked all his life and never suffered from a single stroke or lung disease, so smoking is not as injurious as it is made out to be. Eg. 2. Nissans are terribly unreliable - I once owned a Nissan that broke down on me. 6) Ambiguity in the statements where the contextual meaning of certain words or phrases in the statements is not clear or certain. 7) Circular arguments or Begging the question where a premise presented is nothing but the writers viewpoint (conclusion) restated in different words i.e. the argument uses the conclusion to prove itself. This is a common strategy when the person making the claim has no real evidence to support his case beyond "this is true because it can't be false." Eg. Democracy (government elected by a majority vote) is the best form of government since a majority of people across the world have voted for democracy as their favored form of governance. Additional Information This fallacy is similar to Catch-22, a paradoxical situation in which an individual cannot avoid a problem because of contradictory constraints or rules. The term formulated by Joseph Heller in his novel Catch 22, involves the case of John Yossarian, a U.S. Army Air Forces bombardier, who wishes to be grounded from combat flight. This will only happen if he is evaluated by the squadron's flight surgeon and found "unfit to fly." "Unfit" would be any pilot who is willing to fly such dangerous missions, as one would have to be mad to volunteer for possible death. However, to be evaluated, he must request the evaluation, an act that is considered sufficient proof for being declared sane. These conditions make it impossible to be declared "unfit." The "Catch-22" is that "anyone who wants to get out of combat duty isn't really crazy." Hence, pilots who request a mental fitness evaluation are sane, and therefore must fly in combat. At the same time, if an evaluation is not requested by the pilot, he will never receive one and can never be found insane, meaning he must also fly in combat. Catch-22 ensures that no pilot can ever be grounded for being insane even if he is.

8) Red

Herring or Misdirected evaluation The goal is to redirect the discussion or confuse the issues by introducing a diversionary topic that is not relevant to the debate. This allows the debater to escape to new ground when he has run out of legitimate ammunition to defend his position on the original topic. The fallacy's name refers to the practice of dragging dead animals (including smelly fish) across the trail of a fox to redirect the foxhounds that are following the trail to lead them away from the fox. Such arguments are used as options usually in strengthening or weakening questions. The question paper setter knows your mis-interpretation and will frame a choice to confuse you. An example is given below to explain this fallacy. Dr. Pablo: I'm not sure the test results that have been released are the actual results from the tests that were conducted. I have an indication that the real results may have been suppressed by a group of individuals associated with the Church of Scientology. How they got control of the test results is uncertain. They may have secretly had members in the team that conducted the tests. There are many people who do not want the truth about the genetic link between humans and Neanderthals disclosed. I think you can imagine why. I am continuing to try to locate the real results. I ask that you and your colleagues in the press follow my lead. If there is a conspiracy to suppress the truth here, you need to follow it wherever it leads. NB: The classic red herring in these situations is the conspiracy theory. Anytime things don't go as planned or hoped, then it must be because some secret, subversive group is working behind the scenes with ulterior motives to take control of things. Conspiracies are perfect diversions, because no matter how hard you look or how often you fail to find evidence to disprove the conspiracy, it will live forever. Finding no evidence of a conspiracy in the mind of believers only proves how deep the conspiracy goes and how deep its cover. In the meantime, everyone has forgotten about the original story. In this case do modern humans and Neanderthals share any DNA?

9) Attack on the Arguer rather than the Argument (Ad Hominem) - The Latin translates "to the man" and refers to the strategy of attacking the person rather than attacking the idea he presents. Rather than debate the original argument on its merits, the opponent makes an attack upon some irrelevant fact about the person presenting the theory or claim. Eg. His demands for raising the taxes do not make any economic sense, anyways he himself lives in a luxury house. 10) Choices that negate premises One should remember that the premises in an argument give us useful facts. One cannot question the premises. How to eliminate wrong options in Critical Reasoning: The wrong options usually fall into the following categories.

1. Opposite: An option which does exactly opposite of what is asked is an opposite option. For example, an option which weakens the argument instead of strengthening it. 2. Irrelevant: An option which talks about something not relevant to the question. 3. Off-track: This is an option which is related but does not hit the bulls-eye of the argument. It can also be called as a wayward argument. 4. Beyond scope: This is an option which talks of something which appears beyond the scope of the passage. Generally, there is extra data in this choice. 5. Funny: There are some options which are unduly funny.for e.g. The paragraph is talking about cancerand the option addresses stomach aches! 6. Poetic: They are looking for a logical choice. So poetic choices can generally be ruled out. 7. Opinions without substance: Some options may be at the level of a belief or opinion but might lack substance. Guidelines for Summary of paragraph in Critical Reasoning: The Question type may also appear as Which of the following best captures the essence of the text? The strategy here should be similar to central idea/ theme question type in Reading Comprehension. Gauge the central idea of the given paragraph keeping track of the details. Generally the wrong options have the following characteristics: Incomplete information/Narrow: When you read this option you get a feeling that it is incomplete in summarizing the passage. Excessive information/verbosity: When you read this choice you get a feeling that the choice is long winded and verbose. Wrong Information / verbosity: This is very common. The choice seems to sum up the paragraph but one or two elements are deliberately twisted or distorted. Hence it is a misleading choice. Extra information / Beyond scope: This choice talks about points not given in the paragraph. Guidelines for Para Completion (Last Continuation as a C.R. Question Type: sentence missing) or Logical

1. Identify the core idea or the theme of the paragraph. 2. Look for clues in the choices. Normally the correct choice is the one which falls under the theme. 3. The choice may expand / extend the idea or contrast the idea running in the paragraph. So pay attention to the thought flow in the paragraph. Also pay attention to the tense maintained in the paragraph.

4. Many times the last but one sentence of the paragraph can also provide a clue. 5. Usually the correct choice will not deviate from the subject matter too much. If the paragraph is not an abstruse [i.e. where there is an abrupt shift in topic] one, then the topic has to remain the same. 6. Short, creative end: Sometimes the correct choice turns out to be a short creative one which adds on/carries forward the last but one line in an emphatic manner. 7. Tone: The tone of the correct choice is usually in line with the tone of the paragraph. If the tone is opposite then it would be preceded by a contrast word like but/however. Usually a paragraph ends with a remark, result or suggestion presenting the authors attitude or outlook regarding the topic. Guidelines for Facts, Inferences, Jugements Information and ideas used, by an author, as Premises in an argument are the authors Facts in FIJs (the author presents these as statements that are verifiable). - All Inferences (incl. Conclusions) ie. what the author understands will follow, or can be expected to follow, from the Premises in an argument are the authors Inferences in FIJs. However, such statements present understanding (logical derivation) only, and do not indicate opinion. - When an author makes statements that go beyond presentation of understanding, and offer opinions, these are the authors Judgements in FIJs. Statements indicating opinions, decisions, plans, strategy, judgements, approval/disapproval and so on would fall into this category. Please keep in mind, however while the statements in a question set may refer to a particular issue or matter, each statement must be evaluated independently of the others. The exception to this would be if a statement actually makes a reference, plainly or by implication, to any of the other statements for instance, the presence of grammatical connectives could draw attention to other statements. While attempting to identify statements as F I or J, you need to pay attention to the focus of the sentence, so that incidental observations and descriptions do not distract you. For example 1) It cant get closer than this A desperate farm worker, standing on the track and waving his towel frantically, managed to help avert a major disaster this morning when, thanks to his signals, the GT express screeched to a halt a mere 6 feet from a spot where the rails had been removed from the tracks. Irrespective of the opinion-like observation at the start of the sentence, and the various adjectives which clearly indicate the writers impression of a close call, the sentence is clearly intended to deliver information and is therefore a fact.

2) Lack of education does not preclude recognition of social responsibility an illiterate farm worker who helped avert a major disaster this morning, at considerable risk to himself, has shown us that. Again, while the start of the sentence may seem like an opinion, the sentence actually serves to present the writers understanding that the uneducated can be socially responsible, based on the information of the mornings incident. This is an inference. 3) Our nation is yet to develop in certain social aspects but, as even rural folk can sometimes demonstrate, sincere concern on the part of the common man is not one of them. While the words used may not seem to convey strong opinion, it is clear that the writer is expressing approval of the outlook of the common man a personal opinion. This is a judgement. As in other cases, practice helps here as well try applying these methods of evaluation to opinion-based articles that you read in the papers and magazines in the course of your general preparation. You would then be able to recognize certain common aspects in sentence structure that would help you quicken your recognition and evaluation. Some more examples: The sentences below need to be classified as Fact, Inference, Judgement The sky is heavily overcast today (Fact) Its likely to rain (Inference Understanding or belief based on prior knowledge) You would do well to carry your raincoat (Judgement Recommendation made) Theres a sudden cool and moist breeze, cloud over soon (Inference Understanding drawn from the knowledge that a cool and itll moist breeze is usually followed by the gathering of clouds) We can hope for some rain. (Inference We can hope for indicates that there is some basis for the hope and understanding is based on some knowledge or observation) This should bring the smiles back to the faces of our drought stricken farmers (Inference Expected rain would ease the suffering of farmers who face drought) This should bring the smiles back to the faces of our farmers (Judgement This indicates that the author assumes and therefore his opinion is that the smiles are missing only because the farmers are waiting for rain)