One topic you often hear mentioned in relation to argumentation is scope. The
scope of an argument is the range to which the premises and conclusion
encompass certain ideas. For example, consider an argument discussing a new
surgical technique. The ideas of surgery and medicine are within the scope of
the argument. The idea of federal monetary policy, on the other hand, would
not be within the scope of the argument.
Arguments are sometimes described as having a narrow (or limited) scope or a
wide (or broad) scope. An argument with a narrow scope is definite in its
statements, whereas a wide scope argument is less definite and allows for a
greater range of possibility. When we begin to examine individual questions,
we will return to this idea and show how it can be used to help consider
answer choices in certain situations.
Scope can be useful idea to consider when examining answer choices, because
some answer choices go beyond the bounds of what the author has established
in the argument. However, scope is also a concept that is overused in modern
LSAT preparation. One test preparation company used to tell instructors that if
they could not answer a student’s question, they should just say that the
answer was out of the scope of the argument! As we will see, there are always
definite, identifiable reasons that can be used to eliminate incorrect answer choices.
No comments:
Post a Comment