A little embarrassed I fell into the trap so easily after spending so much time talking about the traps. I think I didn't understand just how tempting that they were when written out in English, rather than how obviously wrong they were in the lessons. Won't make the same mistake again, I hope!
Got this correct, but had a "how to study" type of question -- Is it bad if I got the answer correct, but didn't catch how the negates "all" fits into B, but just intuitively got to the "some" conclusion?
Also, in every single LSAT question - is it recommended that you read through all of the answer choices before selecting the answer? For this one, I read until C and it was a no brainer that B was the correct answer, so I submitted it first and then went through all of the answer choices in the blind review. Wondering when taking the actual LSAT if that's bad practice.
@smileeugenie First off your intuition served you well in inferring the negated all if not overtly clocking how it was working. In this question there wasn't another answer choice that preyed on an imprecise understanding of that translation, but some questions will absolutely catch you out on little things like that. That is why diligent study of language is important for conditional logic questions in particular and for the test broadly.
Secondly, it can be right to move on once you found the answer. The test is so tightly paced that moving on once you've found the answer can help you save time. This is best for questions that are easy to predict the answer for though. However, I always flag questions where I skip some answers so that I can come back if I have time at the end. Like I mentioned before it can be easy to be imprecise with language when you are going fast, or there could be a better answer further down.
@RosaVelez Me too! I read answer choice D about 5 or 6 times because the double negative just feels so hard to wrap my head around! They make it look so easy in the vid!! AHHH
It would be helpful to have more LSAT questions sprinkled through these lessons just like this. I know that may be coming later, but I think it could speed up understanding how the concepts apply to the test so we can focus more on drilling actual questions.
Is there a way to pull up questions by type, so we can drill ourselves on what we are currently learning?
@oldguy Agreed! I actually think it would be especially nice to have them in the skill builders. I crush those, but once I'm faced with diagraming an actual LSAT stimulus I'm totally lost.
got it wrong first take. tbh i didnt diagram anything. then i did blind review and actually wrote it out and realized how obvious it was. i hate to admit it but it helped and got it right after reading out my conclusion LOL.
DANNGGG they got me with this one, i def had in my head that the clean up and the fair happened at the same time.. got it right on BR though so better than nothing!
"Because the spring cleanup took place at the same time as the downtown arts fair, we know that there are at least some spring cleanup participants who are not active in the town's artistic circles."
Isn't there a (supporter) necessary assumption here that one could not do both the spring cleanup and the arts fair?
I know the explanation says this can't be inferred, but I'm not understanding how not inferring this isn't necessary for the conclusion to follow (i.e., since the stimulus indicated its conclusion with "Because").
@FultonHoover We're just meant to come up with a conclusion if the statements are true. The statement from the prompt doesn't contain a completely valid argument, but for our purposes in this question, we don't care about that. We just care about what we can conclude if everything in the prompt is true.
@FultonHoover I've realized its a challenge in itself to make sure you are understanding the question you're being asked correctly, so you aren't alone! I've definitely gotten some wrong due to exactly that. Its crazy how our brains will just make connections that aren't there!
Is it incorrect to say ["some" (in place of "each of the many") people who participated in the town's annual cleanup received a community recognition certificate] and diagram it like (participated <- S -> certificate) ?
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Hold on there, you need to slow down.
We love that you want post in our discussion forum! Just come back in a bit to post again!
Sorry, you need a subscription for that.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.
88 comments
apparently i misunderstood the concept of contrapositive
"Persons who are active in the town's artistic circles are not concerned with the town's environment"
I ended up interpreting 'each of the many people' as 'many of the people who did this each got this', so:
P -m-> SC -> RC
does that logically follow from the phrase, or did I just get lucky that the first part of the relationship wasn't asked about?
solved right away what must be true in my head, but when i write it out in Lawgic I get confused , still need more practice i guess
A little embarrassed I fell into the trap so easily after spending so much time talking about the traps. I think I didn't understand just how tempting that they were when written out in English, rather than how obviously wrong they were in the lessons. Won't make the same mistake again, I hope!
I literally told myself "the two events could've been at the same place"
This one really challenged me.
solved this in my head and i got the correct answer with time to spare, which tells me that this module has really helped
Got this correct, but had a "how to study" type of question -- Is it bad if I got the answer correct, but didn't catch how the negates "all" fits into B, but just intuitively got to the "some" conclusion?
Also, in every single LSAT question - is it recommended that you read through all of the answer choices before selecting the answer? For this one, I read until C and it was a no brainer that B was the correct answer, so I submitted it first and then went through all of the answer choices in the blind review. Wondering when taking the actual LSAT if that's bad practice.
@smileeugenie First off your intuition served you well in inferring the negated all if not overtly clocking how it was working. In this question there wasn't another answer choice that preyed on an imprecise understanding of that translation, but some questions will absolutely catch you out on little things like that. That is why diligent study of language is important for conditional logic questions in particular and for the test broadly.
Secondly, it can be right to move on once you found the answer. The test is so tightly paced that moving on once you've found the answer can help you save time. This is best for questions that are easy to predict the answer for though. However, I always flag questions where I skip some answers so that I can come back if I have time at the end. Like I mentioned before it can be easy to be imprecise with language when you are going fast, or there could be a better answer further down.
Why is "Each of the many people" read as the group 1 quantifier "each" instead of "many"?
@malop91 "Each of the many people" is an overcomplicated way of saying everyone.
Each of the many people
every single one of the many people
all of the many people
all of the people.
I get all the practice questions right but I'm a couple minutes over each time
The double negatives are still kicking my butt but excited that drawing them out is helping.
@RosaVelez Me too! I read answer choice D about 5 or 6 times because the double negative just feels so hard to wrap my head around! They make it look so easy in the vid!! AHHH
as someone who struggled a lot with the skill builders it was VERY reassuring to get this correct and help me no longer feel like a lost cause.
@EmilyEckenroth right!! I can literally feel the hard work paying off from those skill builders
It would be helpful to have more LSAT questions sprinkled through these lessons just like this. I know that may be coming later, but I think it could speed up understanding how the concepts apply to the test so we can focus more on drilling actual questions.
Is there a way to pull up questions by type, so we can drill ourselves on what we are currently learning?
@oldguy We're adding more! If you want similar questions, you can filter for MBT and Quantifier.
@oldguy Agreed! I actually think it would be especially nice to have them in the skill builders. I crush those, but once I'm faced with diagraming an actual LSAT stimulus I'm totally lost.
got it wrong first take. tbh i didnt diagram anything. then i did blind review and actually wrote it out and realized how obvious it was. i hate to admit it but it helped and got it right after reading out my conclusion LOL.
DANNGGG they got me with this one, i def had in my head that the clean up and the fair happened at the same time.. got it right on BR though so better than nothing!
My entire diagram of this was correct, and I still got jumbled in the reverse language of the answer choices.
15 seconds over! Not bad!
"Because the spring cleanup took place at the same time as the downtown arts fair, we know that there are at least some spring cleanup participants who are not active in the town's artistic circles."
Isn't there a (supporter) necessary assumption here that one could not do both the spring cleanup and the arts fair?
I know the explanation says this can't be inferred, but I'm not understanding how not inferring this isn't necessary for the conclusion to follow (i.e., since the stimulus indicated its conclusion with "Because").
What am I missing?
@FultonHoover We're just meant to come up with a conclusion if the statements are true. The statement from the prompt doesn't contain a completely valid argument, but for our purposes in this question, we don't care about that. We just care about what we can conclude if everything in the prompt is true.
@JustinWeich I see. Guess I was just giving too much thought to this. Thank you
@FultonHoover I've realized its a challenge in itself to make sure you are understanding the question you're being asked correctly, so you aren't alone! I've definitely gotten some wrong due to exactly that. Its crazy how our brains will just make connections that aren't there!
@oldguy exactly! Those assumptions are dangerous!
Thank god im not a complete chud
hurt my brain but we did it
Finally got one right in a reasonable time lol.
Is it incorrect to say ["some" (in place of "each of the many") people who participated in the town's annual cleanup received a community recognition certificate] and diagram it like (participated <- S -> certificate) ?
@ognikooo Wait. I got it. "Each of the Many" is "All"...
Is anyone else selecting the correct answer but it get marked as incorrect?
Clarification: Is B true because the some arrow can be flipped?