Week 7 Synthesis: Strengthen vs Weaken vs Evaluate vs Paradox
Week 7 Synthesis: Strengthen vs Weaken vs Evaluate vs Paradox
Four types that all engage with an argument's evidentiary support, but ask for different things: push it up, push it down, identify what would move it either way, or explain an apparent tension with no argument to push at all.
Decision Matrix
| Type | Task | Signal |
|---|---|---|
| Strengthen | Make the conclusion more likely | "most strengthens," "most supports" |
| Weaken | Make the conclusion less likely | "most weakens," "most seriously undermines" |
| Evaluate | Identify useful info either direction | "would be most useful to know," "most important to determine" |
| Paradox | Explain, don't argue — no conclusion to move | "explain the discrepancy," "resolve the apparent paradox" |
Official Timed Section
One drill-tier LR section, timed at 35 minutes, mixed. Blind-review and log.
Practice items on this page are curriculum-authored in LSAT style; they are not official LSAC questions. Real drilling happens on LawHub — see the assignment below.
Q1. A stimulus presents two facts in apparent tension and asks for the best explanation. Which type is this, and does the answer need to make one fact more or less likely?
Week 8 moves to the Inference family: Must Be True, Most Strongly Supported, and Must Be False — where the task shifts from evaluating an argument to reading precisely.