Graduate Medical School Admissions Test (GAMSAT) Section I: Reasoning in Humanities and Social Sciences Flashcards

24 sample cards from the Section I: Reasoning in Humanities and Social Sciences deck

Sampled from the end of the deck, so these are different cards from the ones shown on the syllabus page.

1. Name three common persuasive appeals an advertisement or poster may use.

   Ethos (credibility/authority), pathos (emotion), and logos (logic/evidence). Ads also use bandwagon, aspiration, and association with desirable values.

2. Why is cultural and political context important when interpreting an image?

   Symbols, gestures and references carry meanings specific to a time, place and culture; without that context a viewer may miss irony, allusion, or the target of the critique.

3. How can a propaganda poster's context change its meaning over time?

   An image persuasive within its original political moment may read as ironic, dated, or disturbing to later audiences who do not share its assumptions, so historical context is needed to recover intended effect.

4. What are the three core components of an argument's structure?

   Premises (supporting reasons/evidence), a conclusion (the claim being supported), and the inferential link (the reasoning connecting premises to conclusion).

5. How do you identify the conclusion of an argument within a passage?

   Look for the claim that the other statements are offered to support; conclusion indicators include 'therefore', 'thus', 'hence', 'so', and 'it follows that'. The conclusion is what the author wants you to accept.

6. Distinguish a 'premise' from an 'assumption' in argument analysis.

   A premise is a stated reason given to support the conclusion; an assumption is an unstated premise the argument relies on but does not make explicit. Identifying hidden assumptions is key to evaluating validity.

7. What is the difference between the 'validity' and the 'soundness' of an argument?

   Validity concerns logical form: if the premises were true, the conclusion would follow. Soundness requires both that the argument is valid AND that its premises are actually true.

8. When evaluating evidence and claims, what questions test the quality of evidence?

   Is it relevant, sufficient, representative, and reliable? Consider the source, sample size, possible bias, and whether the evidence actually supports the specific claim made.

9. Distinguish 'correlation' from 'causation' and why it matters in evaluating claims.

   Correlation means two variables vary together; causation means one produces the other. Treating correlation as causation is a common reasoning flaw, since a third factor or coincidence may explain the link.

10. What is the difference between a fact, an opinion and a value judgement in a passage?

    A fact can be verified true or false; an opinion is a belief or interpretation; a value judgement evaluates worth or morality (good/bad, right/wrong). Distinguishing them is essential to weighing claims.

11. What does it mean to 'weigh competing perspectives' on an issue?

    To fairly represent each viewpoint's strongest reasoning and evidence, identify their points of disagreement, and assess relative strengths rather than dismissing one side outright.

12. What is a 'straw man' argument and why is it a flaw when weighing perspectives?

    Misrepresenting an opponent's position in a weakened or distorted form to refute it easily; it is a flaw because it attacks a position the opponent does not actually hold.

13. What does 'applying ideas to a new scenario' test in GAMSAT Section I?

    Whether you can extract the underlying principle from a passage and recognise it operating in, or correctly transfer it to, a different, unfamiliar situation.

14. When applying an author's principle to a new case, what makes an application valid?

    The new case must share the relevant features the principle depends on; an application fails if it relies on a feature the original principle did not concern or ignores a disqualifying difference.

15. In a philosophy extract, distinguish a 'deductive' from an 'inductive' argument.

    Deductive arguments aim for conclusions that follow necessarily from premises (certain if valid and sound); inductive arguments generalise from evidence to probable conclusions (strong or weak, never certain).

16. Distinguish 'deontological' from 'consequentialist' ethics.

    Deontological ethics judges actions by adherence to duties/rules/rights regardless of outcome (e.g. Kant); consequentialist ethics judges actions by their results, the right act maximising good outcomes (e.g. utilitarianism).

17. What is 'utilitarianism' in one sentence?

    A consequentialist ethical theory holding that the morally right action is the one that produces the greatest overall happiness or wellbeing for the greatest number.

18. When reading history or political commentary, why must you consider the author's standpoint?

    Historical and political writing is interpretive and selective; the author's period, allegiances and purpose shape which facts are emphasised, so identifying standpoint is essential to evaluating the account.

19. Distinguish a 'primary' from a 'secondary' source in a history passage.

    A primary source is firsthand evidence from the time studied (letters, records, artefacts); a secondary source interprets or analyses primary material after the fact (a historian's commentary).

20. In sociology and psychology passages, distinguish 'nature' from 'nurture' explanations of behaviour.

    Nature attributes traits/behaviour to innate, genetic or biological factors; nurture attributes them to environment, upbringing, learning and culture. Many passages argue for an interaction of both.

21. What is the difference between 'culture' and 'society' as used in social-science passages?

    Society refers to a group of people organised through enduring relationships and institutions; culture refers to the shared beliefs, values, customs and practices that those people produce and transmit.

22. Define an 'ad hominem' fallacy, common in opinion and political extracts.

    Attacking the person making an argument rather than the argument itself; it is fallacious because the truth of a claim is independent of the character or motives of the person asserting it.

23. What distinguishes a personal essay, a memoir and a biography?

    A personal essay explores a theme through the writer's own reflection; a memoir is the author's narrative of specific remembered experiences; a biography is an account of someone else's life written by another person.

24. In reading memoir or personal essay, why should the narrating 'I' be read critically?

    The first-person narrator is a constructed, selective and potentially unreliable perspective; the writer shapes events for effect, so the reader should attend to bias, hindsight, and what is omitted.

What this deck covers

Section I: Reasoning in Humanities and Social Sciences flashcards FAQ