Lots of great theories in this comment section on what could cause a correlation between increased cheese consumption and increased death by entanglement in bedsheets.
I'll throw out another one... What if people who eat cheese tend to drink wine while enjoying their cheese? If drinking wine before heading to bed puts one in a non-sober state, maybe they're more likely to end up tangled in their sheets?
My first thought regarding the cheese and death by bedsheets correlation was that cheese can contribute to sleep disturbances. These disturbances may cause individuals to have more vivid nightmares. Hence, this could explain how A (higher cheese consumption) causes B (# of people who die by becoming entangled in their bedsheets). I thought the "duh it's wrong" attitude was not helpful, as there actually could be an explanation that links the two claims together. Additionally, I think this is wrongfully leading people to give up if the explanation isn't a given (which is exactly how the LSAT wants to trick you). #feedback
About the cheese-bed entanglement correlation, it could be that wealthier populations eat more cheese; wealthier populations also live longer, and the elderly are more likely to get seriously hurt and die by becoming entangled in their bedsheets. So it could be hypothesis 3: C causes A and B.
The last example could probably be removed from this page as it isn't really helpful.
Hypothesis 1: A causes B. Cheese consumption causes death by entanglement in bedsheets. How? Um, I have no idea.
You not having any idea doesn't explain anything nor does it help me understand. It's you shrugging your shoulders and walking away. You do the same for the other hypotheses except the right answer.
The sort of lazy explanation that goes "That's wrong, duh. That's wrong, duh. That's wrong, duh. And here's the right answer, obviously. Done."
But just as a point, and maybe you can point out the problem with the explanation:
Cheese consumption causes death by entanglement in bed sheets by increasing the likelihood of brain activity associated with "tossing and turning" which, when consumed near bedtime, results in a higher risk of becoming entangled by your bed sheets. Those who consume cheese but do not sleep or lay in bed might have the same brain activity but there is no risk of dying since they're not in bed.
A good (3) explanation for C causes A & B for the firefighters and fire example:
Rich neighborhoods cause both. the increased funding/taxes leads to bigger responses to fires in general so more fire fighters show up. the wealth in the area also means people have bigger houses in general, which leads to bigger fires as there is more to burn.
Definitely request more lessons like this where the main focus is just going through additional examples. Helps a lot!!! Especially for those of us who typically learn something through pattern recognition.
If all there is a correlation, are we evaluating these to show the best possible causal relationship? Because if correlation does not equal causation, are we just trying to figure out what the most likely causal relationship is even though we cannot be certain? #help.
Hypothesis 3 for the firefighters and fires (A and B not related, caused by C):
Firefighters meticulously plan out their meetings (time, date, place) months in advance. They also post these meetings to the public. It just so happens that there is a dedicated group of anti-firefighter arsonists that torch the location of every meeting location minutes to hours ahead of time. Sounds crazy, but that's just my theory!
3
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.
68 comments
Can we all appreciate how funny and well-understanding the examples are?
The last example about bedsheets and cheese consumption was just too good to forget
Lots of great theories in this comment section on what could cause a correlation between increased cheese consumption and increased death by entanglement in bedsheets.
I'll throw out another one... What if people who eat cheese tend to drink wine while enjoying their cheese? If drinking wine before heading to bed puts one in a non-sober state, maybe they're more likely to end up tangled in their sheets?
I geeked out over this lesson. Everything clicked!!!
what if the fire station was on fire #law
The third scenario is the source or signal for the fire in the first place. C the sound of the alarm -> Fire Fighters -> size of fire
The third hypothesis in the first example is perception. You perceive there to be a lot of firefighters and you also perceive the fire to be very big.
Maybe i've read too much descartes
You might not mourn by eating ice cream, but I sure do.
My first thought regarding the cheese and death by bedsheets correlation was that cheese can contribute to sleep disturbances. These disturbances may cause individuals to have more vivid nightmares. Hence, this could explain how A (higher cheese consumption) causes B (# of people who die by becoming entangled in their bedsheets). I thought the "duh it's wrong" attitude was not helpful, as there actually could be an explanation that links the two claims together. Additionally, I think this is wrongfully leading people to give up if the explanation isn't a given (which is exactly how the LSAT wants to trick you). #feedback
C, the firefighter's were given an anonymous tip from a pyromaniac who started the large fire as the firefighters arrived.
About the cheese-bed entanglement correlation, it could be that wealthier populations eat more cheese; wealthier populations also live longer, and the elderly are more likely to get seriously hurt and die by becoming entangled in their bedsheets. So it could be hypothesis 3: C causes A and B.
The last example could probably be removed from this page as it isn't really helpful.
You not having any idea doesn't explain anything nor does it help me understand. It's you shrugging your shoulders and walking away. You do the same for the other hypotheses except the right answer.
The sort of lazy explanation that goes "That's wrong, duh. That's wrong, duh. That's wrong, duh. And here's the right answer, obviously. Done."
But just as a point, and maybe you can point out the problem with the explanation:
Cheese consumption causes death by entanglement in bed sheets by increasing the likelihood of brain activity associated with "tossing and turning" which, when consumed near bedtime, results in a higher risk of becoming entangled by your bed sheets. Those who consume cheese but do not sleep or lay in bed might have the same brain activity but there is no risk of dying since they're not in bed.
A good (3) explanation for C causes A & B for the firefighters and fire example:
Rich neighborhoods cause both. the increased funding/taxes leads to bigger responses to fires in general so more fire fighters show up. the wealth in the area also means people have bigger houses in general, which leads to bigger fires as there is more to burn.
people in Wisconsin def get real kinky with the cheese
Definitely request more lessons like this where the main focus is just going through additional examples. Helps a lot!!! Especially for those of us who typically learn something through pattern recognition.
This is such a great lesson. Thank you
This lesson HELPED a ton!!!!
#feedback it's a crime that you would put so many banger paragraphs in here and NOT have them voiced over with a video.
If all there is a correlation, are we evaluating these to show the best possible causal relationship? Because if correlation does not equal causation, are we just trying to figure out what the most likely causal relationship is even though we cannot be certain? #help.
This makes a lot of sense thank you
People in Maine need to stop consuming margarine.
Are the writers ok? These examples are starting to get a little weird lol. I mean the ice cream one got dark real fast.
A causes B
B causes A
Some secret third thing causes A and B
I lied, there's nothing
For the last example, what if I said eating cheese causes one to become obese, and being obese increases the odds of becoming tangled in the sheets?
Remind me not to eat Ice Cream while re-reading this lesson. Hello darkness my old friend!
Hypothesis 3 for the firefighters and fires (A and B not related, caused by C):
Firefighters meticulously plan out their meetings (time, date, place) months in advance. They also post these meetings to the public. It just so happens that there is a dedicated group of anti-firefighter arsonists that torch the location of every meeting location minutes to hours ahead of time. Sounds crazy, but that's just my theory!