Bocconi Law Test key terms

A conclusion drawn from stated evidence rather than stated outright. In logic and reading tests, you must judge whether the evidence really supports it, and how strongly.

A statement offered as support for a conclusion in an argument. Identifying premises means separating what is asserted as evidence from what the author wants you to accept because of it.

The claim an argument tries to establish. It is usually signalled by words such as 'therefore', 'so' or 'it follows that', and is what the other statements are meant to support.

An unstated premise the argument needs in order to work. Spotting it means asking what must be true, though nobody said it, for the evidence to support the conclusion.

In deductive logic, the property of an argument whose conclusion must be true if its premises are true. Validity concerns structure, not whether the premises are actually true.

A deductive argument is sound when it is valid and all its premises are actually true. Soundness therefore guarantees a true conclusion, whereas validity alone does not.

Reasoning in which the conclusion follows with necessity from the premises. If the premises are true and the form valid, the conclusion cannot be false.

Reasoning that generalises from observed cases to a probable conclusion. It can be strong or weak but never guarantees its conclusion, unlike deduction.

A deductive argument with two premises and a conclusion, classically in subject-predicate form, as in 'All humans are mortal; Socrates is human; therefore Socrates is mortal'.

A common pattern of flawed reasoning that looks persuasive but fails logically, such as attacking the person instead of the argument or appealing to popularity.

A fallacy in which someone misrepresents an opponent's position in a weakened form, refutes that distorted version, and pretends the original view has been answered.

A fallacy that rejects a claim by attacking the person who made it rather than addressing the reasons given. The speaker's character is irrelevant to the truth of the argument.

A fallacy that presents only two options when others exist, forcing a choice between extremes. Often signalled by 'either... or' framings that ignore middle ground.

A fallacy in which the conclusion is smuggled into the premises, so the argument assumes what it sets out to prove and gives no independent support.

A broad statement drawn from limited cases. In reasoning tests, check whether the sample is large and representative enough to support the breadth of the claim.

A condition that must hold for something to occur, though it may not be enough on its own. Oxygen is necessary for fire but not sufficient to cause it.

A condition whose presence guarantees the outcome, though the outcome might also arise other ways. Distinguishing it from necessary conditions is a frequent reasoning trap.

The central claim a passage advances, usually announced early and developed through the text. Locating it helps you judge which details are supporting evidence and which are digressions.

The most important point a text communicates as a whole, broader than any single sentence. Distinguish it from supporting details and from minor side observations.

The attitude an author conveys towards the subject, such as ironic, neutral, critical or admiring. Tone is revealed through word choice, imagery and emphasis rather than stated directly.

The level of formality in language suited to a context, ranging from academic prose to colloquial speech. Recognising register helps you interpret a writer's stance and audience.

The associations and emotional colouring a word carries beyond its literal meaning. 'Childlike' and 'childish' share a core sense but differ sharply in connotation.

The literal, dictionary meaning of a word, as opposed to its emotional or cultural associations. Reading questions often turn on the gap between denotation and connotation.

A condensed restatement of a text's essential content in your own words, omitting examples and repetition while preserving the main argument and its structure.

Restating a passage's meaning in different words without changing its sense. It tests comprehension because a faithful paraphrase preserves nuance rather than merely swapping synonyms.

The way sentences and paragraphs are linked so a text reads as a connected whole, achieved through pronouns, connectives and repeated key terms.

The logical consistency and overall unity of a text, so that its parts form a clear, ordered argument rather than a jumble of unrelated statements.

A word or phrase such as 'however', 'because' or 'therefore' that signals the logical relation between ideas. Connectives are crucial clues for tracking an argument's direction.

An implicit background assumption a sentence takes for granted, as 'Have you stopped lying?' presupposes that you were lying. Noticing presuppositions exposes loaded questions.

The art of using language persuasively, including figures of speech, appeals to emotion and structural emphasis. Analysing rhetoric means asking how a text tries to move its reader.

The theory that moral and legal principles exist in nature or reason, discoverable by humans and superior to any ruler's decrees. Associated with Aquinas and with Stoic thought.

Law enacted by a recognised human authority, such as statutes and decrees, as distinct from moral or natural principles. Legal positivism holds that valid enactment, not moral merit, makes law.

The idea that political authority derives from an agreement among people to surrender some freedom for security and order. Developed by Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau in contrasting forms.

A thought experiment describing human life before political society. Hobbes pictured it as a war of all against all; Locke saw natural rights already binding individuals.

The principle that everyone, including rulers, is subject to publicly known law applied equally and impartially, rather than to arbitrary personal power.

The division of state authority into legislative, executive and judicial branches so that each checks the others. Central to Montesquieu's analysis and to modern constitutional design.

The fundamental set of rules establishing a state's institutions, allocating powers and usually protecting rights. It ranks above ordinary legislation and is typically amended by special procedure.

The requirement that legal proceedings follow fair, established procedures, including notice, a hearing and an impartial decision-maker, before a person is deprived of rights.

The principle that an accused person is treated as innocent until guilt is proven beyond reasonable doubt by the prosecution, which bears the burden of proof.

The obligation on a party to produce evidence sufficient to establish a disputed fact. In criminal trials it rests on the prosecution, which must meet the required standard.