So just to make sure I'm correct: In order to find the strongest hypothesis, we just ask 'how'? I feel like that might be intuitive if we had more than a minute and a half per question... Someone clear it up for me please!
My questions might sound a little be stupid, but I wanna get it off the table. Is every hypothesis a good hypothesis? The reason why I'am asking this, is that we can nearly fidn alternative hypothesis for every argument, how to understand which one is more strong to support the argument?
Great lesson, my only #feedback I'd give is in regards to the formatting. Maybe experiment with singling out examples so information is easier to recall/look back to while reading initially.
I'll use an example :
For example, let's say that you observed that eight out of the top ten winners of the Boston Marathon trained in the Himalayas. Naturally, you wonder "why?" Here's a hypothesis: high altitude training causes elite runners to run faster and farther at sea level. That's a causal story. That's a potential explanation.
Turns into:
For example, let's say that you observed that eight out of the top ten winners of the Boston Marathon trained in the Himalayas. Naturally, you wonder "why?" Here's a hypothesis:
High altitude training causes elite runners to run faster and farther at sea level.
That's a causal story. That's a potential explanation.
if we cannot identify a casual mechanism does that mean our original hypothesis is weak? #help
5
Topics
PT Questions
Select Preptest
You've discovered a premium feature!
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!
Subscribers can learn all the LSAT secrets.
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.
27 comments
The poor dolphins
It would be really helpful to see an actual test example with answers to see how to apply this on the actual test
does this feel really intuitive to anyone else, or I am I being naive?
#feedback should have a practice drill here
I really wish these lesson videos used a standard font instead of handwriting. Its very hard to read.
The casual laugh after he says 'lets think back about the dead dolphins'. Savage.
so causal arguments can not be true or valid, JUST strong or weak
Do you come up with the How or ..?
So just to make sure I'm correct: In order to find the strongest hypothesis, we just ask 'how'? I feel like that might be intuitive if we had more than a minute and a half per question... Someone clear it up for me please!
My questions might sound a little be stupid, but I wanna get it off the table. Is every hypothesis a good hypothesis? The reason why I'am asking this, is that we can nearly fidn alternative hypothesis for every argument, how to understand which one is more strong to support the argument?
Thanks!
So if im understanding correctly, " Causal Mechanisms" are assumptions the argument makes about the details of the cause and effect relationship?
personally I like to read to the "lets review" section before I start. Helps me get an understanding before I hop in.
Great lesson, my only #feedback I'd give is in regards to the formatting. Maybe experiment with singling out examples so information is easier to recall/look back to while reading initially.
I'll use an example :
For example, let's say that you observed that eight out of the top ten winners of the Boston Marathon trained in the Himalayas. Naturally, you wonder "why?" Here's a hypothesis: high altitude training causes elite runners to run faster and farther at sea level. That's a causal story. That's a potential explanation.
Turns into:
For example, let's say that you observed that eight out of the top ten winners of the Boston Marathon trained in the Himalayas. Naturally, you wonder "why?" Here's a hypothesis:
High altitude training causes elite runners to run faster and farther at sea level.
That's a causal story. That's a potential explanation.
if we cannot identify a casual mechanism does that mean our original hypothesis is weak? #help