Lesson: Dissecting an Argument

Start studying Assumption questions and pay close attention to the nature of the correct answers.

You may just need to keep practicing.

That said, some people just don't read as fast as others, and for them, the proposed timing may be unrealistic. So, rather than read faster (and drastically reduce your comprehension), you may need to spend some time experimenting with different strategies to see which one best suits your memory and reading speed.

For example, you may need to look for questions in the Verbal section where you immediately guess and then use that extra time to ensure better RC accuracy. For example, some CR questions have incredibly long passages and very long answer choices. This might be an excellent candidate for guessing.
Keep in mind that this is a Plan B strategy.

Of course, it's best to answer every question. I'm just talking about situations in which it's really hard for students to complete the Verbal section in 75 minutes.

Keep practicing - you'll get better.

That said, it's not 100% crucial that you identify assumptions when analyzing arguments (although it can help). You can often answer the question without identifying any assumptions. So, don't spend a ton of time looking for assumptions.

Hi jsuc23,

Sorry, I don't know how your question (from 3 days ago!) slipped off my radar.

Good points and good question! Perhaps I could have made the passage less ambiguous. The idea I was trying to convey is that the introduction of Sovkafish is very recent. So recent, in fact, that the Gigafish population has not (yet) been wiped out.

Also, the term "other" (as in "Sovkafish survive by eating OTHER fish") is meant to convey that Sovkafish do not eat members of their own species. Instead, they eat OTHER (non Sovka-type) fish.

So, if we accept those premises, then the release of Dragonfish should limit the Sovkafish population, which should help the Gigafish survive. Of course, all of depends on the hidden assumption that Dragonfish will focus their efforts not eat all of Gigafish

Does that help?

Cheers,
Brent

You're referring to the question that appears at 8:15 in the above video.

The question stem reads: Which of the following, if true, most effectively challenges the conclusion that RELEASING 100 DRAGONFISH INTO CHILLIWACK LAKE WILL ALLOW THE GIGAFISH IN CHILLIWACK LAKE TO SURVIVE?

The assumptions listed (at 10:10 in the video) are things that MUST BE TRUE in order for the conclusion to hold true.

One assumption is THAT the Dragonfish WON'T eat the Gigafish.
We need this to be true in order for the conclusion to hold true.
That is, if the Dragonfish DID eat the Gigafish, then the conclusion would NOT hold true.

Another assumption is that 100 Dragonfish will be sufficient to limit the Sovkafish population.
We need this to be true in order for the conclusion to hold true.
That is, if 100 Dragonfish is NOT SUFFICIENT to limit the Sovkafish population, then the conclusion would NOT hold true.

And so on.

Does that help?

Cheers,
Brent

That's correct.

A premise is something that is stated in the argument. So, if "wolves are not to be blamed for this decrease" is not stated, it's not a premise.

That said, "wolves are not to be blamed for this decrease" could be considered an unstated assumption.

Does that help?

Cheers,
Brent

Keywords can certainly help identify the key components of a passage, but those keywords aren't 100% accurate. When it comes to identifying the conclusion, it helps to ask ourselves "What is the author trying to convince us of?" This will help identify the conclusion.

As I mention in my lesson on Assumption questions (https://www.gmatprepnow.com/module/gmat-critical-reasoning/video/1139), don't spend a lot of time trying to identify assumptions, because every argument we'll have tons of necessary assumptions in order for the conclusion to follow from the premises.

What's important is that you know the role that assumptions play in arguments.

Great observation! Assumptions that link unrelated entities often play key roles in ensuring/strengthening the conclusion.