Past LSAT Explained/PrepTest 45/Method of Argument

attempt to undermine the analysts' argument by questioning the truth of its premises

attempts to undermine the analysts' argument by suggesting that the analysts present it for self-serving reasons

attempts to undermine the analysts' argument by drawing an alternative conclusion from the analysts' premises

argues that the analysts' conclusion is basically right, but suggests that it is somewhat too optimistic

argues in favor of the analysts' conclusion, but does so on the basis of a different body of evidence

proposing an alternative course of action for achieving the objectives of the proposal being argued against

raising considerations in order to show that the proposal being argued against, if strictly implemented, would lead to absurd consequences

using specific examples in order to show that an alternative to the proposal being argued against would better achieve the ends to which the original proposal was directed

introducing a case analogous to the one under consideration to show that a general implementation of the proposal being argued against would be impossible

questioning the motivation of those who made the proposal being argued against

|45/Method of Argument