Free Courses › Reading Comprehension

The questions · Lesson 6 of 9

Author attitude, strengthen and weaken in RC

After this lesson, you can identify an author's attitude toward competing claims in a passage, predict shifts using pivot words, and use that map to evaluate strengthen and weaken answer choices.

8 min video, plus notes and 1 practice question below

In this lesson

• Pause after each paragraph and ask what's the main idea, then evaluate whether the author is stating a fact, giving an opinion, or contrasting 2 ideas.
• Spot pivot words like however, yet, and in contrast. They signal a shift in the author's position and let you predict what the next paragraph will argue.
• Build a mental map of the passage's structure and viewpoints as you read, so you already know the terrain before you touch a strengthen or weaken question.
• Save strengthen, weaken, and analogy questions for last, and name the exact claim being tested before you look at the answer choices.
• Treat any answer choice with always, never, or only if as suspect. The LSAT rewards moderate, supported claims over extreme ones.

Pause after each paragraph to catch the author's attitude

Start with a pause. After you finish a paragraph, stop and ask yourself 1 question: what's the main idea here? Don't let your eyes slide into the next paragraph before you've actually answered that. This single habit stops you from reading the whole passage passively and then having to reread it once you hit the questions.

Once you've named the main idea, evaluate what you just read. Ask who's saying what: is the author stating a plain fact, offering their own opinion, or setting up a contrast between 2 ideas? A sentence like "several residents reported nausea" is stating a fact. A sentence like "this nausea was likely caused by something else" is offering an interpretation. Separating the two as you read is what lets you name the author's actual attitude later instead of guessing at it under time pressure, and it's a habit you build paragraph by paragraph, not something you can reconstruct after the fact on a reread.

Let pivot words predict the next shift in tone

Pay close attention to transition words like however, yet, and in contrast. These are the clearest signal you'll get that the author's argument or opinion is about to shift. If a paragraph opens by describing a commonly held belief, something like many scientists argue that a new technology will surpass human ability within a decade, and then ends with however, some experts disagree, that's a pivot. Pause right there and predict what's coming: the next paragraph is very likely going to lay out the opposing side's reasoning.

As you keep reading, confirm or correct your prediction. If the author goes on to explain specifically why some experts think the original claim is overestimated, you've just confirmed the shift, and you already know where the passage's tension lives. That matters, because when a question later asks about a contrasting viewpoint or the author's overall position, you're not scanning the passage cold. You already mapped exactly where the disagreement sits, which cuts out the guesswork that costs most test takers their time.

Use your mental map to work strengthen and weaken questions

Once you've mapped the passage's viewpoints, use that map to work through the question set in an order that plays to your strengths. Handle main point questions first, since you've already been tracking the author's conclusion the whole way through. Move to detail questions next, using your mental map to locate the right paragraph instead of hunting blind. Save strengthen, weaken, and analogy questions for last, since they take the most work to evaluate and benefit most from having the full passage structure already sorted in your head.

When you do get to a strengthen or weaken question, start by naming the exact claim or argument being tested, not the topic in general, but the specific conclusion. Then use your understanding of the passage's structure, who holds which position and why, to judge which answer choice actually has an impact on that claim. A choice that's true but never touches the argument's reasoning does nothing for you, no matter how relevant it sounds on the surface, and the same goes for an analogy choice that matches the topic but not the underlying logic.

Watch for extreme language when you evaluate the choices

As you evaluate any choice tied to the author's attitude, or a strengthen or weaken question, be cautious with extreme language. Choices that say always or never are rarely correct, because most passage arguments aren't extreme, they're measured. Look instead for choices that are moderately stated and directly supported by what the author actually wrote. The LSAT tends to reward that kind of restraint over big, sweeping claims, so when 2 choices seem close, the more measured one is usually the one that matches the author's actual position.

The short version

• Next time you finish a paragraph, name the author's stance in 1 word: neutral, supportive, or skeptical. If you can't, you're not done with that paragraph yet.
• When you evaluate a strengthen, weaken, or analogy choice, ask whether it actually touches the claim's reasoning, not just its topic; a choice that's true and on-topic but never engages the logic does nothing for the argument.
• Flag any choice using always, never, or only if in your next timed set, and track how many of those you correctly eliminate.

Mark lesson 6 complete