I think this will be answered in later sections, but I have seen the word "generalization" appear a lot on potential LSAT answers like this. Maybe someone could let me know is there is something specific they mean when they mention this?
@Garrett_dom I think the best way to think about it is a claim that applies to more than just specific examples.
"My brother likes swords." -- not a generalization
"Most people like swords." -- generalization
"All people like swords" -- generalization
"Children tend to like swords" -- generalization
I'm sure it can get more nuanced, because it's possible that a claim becomes a generalization depending on the context around it, but that's...generally (usually) how I think about it.
The reason I didn't choose D is because of the verbiage in the answer choice: "offering an alternate explanation of the CORRELATION cited"
I thought because of the wording in the stimulus, "caused by" was indicating a casual relationship. Therefore, I thought answer D was a trick question answer choice.
@Edbnapa Other people are saying the decline is caused by growth in government services. But the editorialist is pushing back on that and suggesting a different explanation.
A is correlated with B
Some people say: A causes B.
Editorialist says: B might cause A.
"B might cause A" is an alternate explanation for the correlation between A and B.
@KateA That's not our intention! J.Y. is just sharing a high-scorer's analysis of the different answers and why they're wrong or right. Is there a particular answer choice on this one that you felt this "judgy" tone? And to be clear, do you feel that this tone is suggesting judgment of viewers? Or is there some line of reasoning for a wrong answer that you felt was not addressed, and so eliminating the answer is unsatisfying? Just trying to get clear on exactly what the problem is and how it can be cleared up here or in future explanations.
@Kevin_Lin Sorry, I commented this when I was tired and in a bad mood. I guess I submitted C for my blind review and was really angry with "wow, this is so wrong I don't even know where to begin." Just felt a little condescending. But kind of a silly thing for me to nitpick about
@KateA 7Sage is quite gentle compared to the way LSAT Demon breaks down answer choices. When studying for the LSAT, expect to make over 1,000 blunders along the way
@Feitan Right, I don't think anyone is suggesting we should draw a diagram for this question. Many explanations simply use visuals for the purpose of clarifying the logic for those who don't understand it well. But by no means should you be drawing out stuff on the vast majority of questions. Probably just 1 or 2 questions in a section are worth some kind of diagram.
Wahoo, I got it correct! It took me about 2 and half minutes but I was able to explain to myself why each answer choice was wrong. I believe it is a strong step in the right direction!
I knew it was either B or D. I think B confused me because of the language. I wasn't sure what counterexample really meant ("now knowing it means an example that contradicts the given statement") and thought at the time it meant that the author was providing an alternate example, similar to D. Should we consider this a missed question since it was due to a language misunderstanding?
I believe a lesson on how correlations can't have counterexamples would be very helpful because I didn't know that.
Been feeling a bit low since I have been struggling, not just with the material but trying to get up early in the morning to study before work then working a full shift and right back at it, but I finally got an answer right without having to do the blind review!!! I know it will take time and more practice but I just want to test good now!
@LoganHjermstad I completely understand I have been struggling to find time between school and other obligations to work on these lessons. I have been feeling behind like I should be doing more than the lessons also but I just don't have enough time.
Why is this considered a correlation phenomena when the stim says, "caused by"? I assumed this meant a direct cause and effect relationship and still got the question correct
I went a minute over and got it right. Got it reccomended for BR and got it wrong on BR because of doubt. Not the first time this has happened. Sometimes I feel like BR is pretty useless :/
@Arshavin Whenever I have a blind review recommendation I check to see if its because I got it wrong or because I spent too much time on it or even sometimes because I switched my answer too much to avoid overthinking and doubting myself.
@smallbrowngirl28 Hi! I think you can only see it once you've started the BR. At the top when it says something like this question has been flagged for BR in pink, there is a small circle with an exclamation point or something at the end of the sentence. If you hover over that circle it tells you why the question was flagged for BR.
Can “caused by” be a consistent indicator to demonstrate the causal relationship?
I.e. “This decline NGO (B) is caused by corresponding growth of gov services (A)” Therefore, anything that follows “caused by” can be interpreted in lawgic as B “caused by” A, means A causes B.
Is that universal for “caused by” being an “indicator”.
Took me 7 minutes, but I got it correct first try, and wrong in Blind review LoL. I just felt forced to choose something in Blind review..so I chose anything just to get off the screen..even though I knew none of the other answer choices were correct. Once I start PT's I hope to get much faster at questions.
Counterexample was a word I didn't know. The definition that came up: an example that shows it contradicts an idea or theory. So it's meant to disprove something or show something is wrong. So in the video, when JY says Cats are nice, and I say wait no, you're wrong, and point out that Garfield and Jerry mean-- that's a counterexample. Which is why B is wrong. The author doesn't say that the conclusion was wrong, in fact they say the conclusion might be right. That's not a counterexample. That's just being nice and curious, looking for alternative explanations.
I chose D but B was the last answer choice I crossed out before choosing D. B was enticing but the word "counterexample" didn't fit because the author wasn't necessarily providing a counterexample (aka another causal phenomenon) they were just providing an alternative hypothesis/explanation.
@Sameer_Ahamad Whether it is the opposite or not still does not negate the fact that it is an "alternative" explanation. What you are doing here is confusing sufficiency for necessity in your futile attempt to be a smart ass. So, you have obviously overlooked the hundreds of lessons relating to sufficiency and necessity prior to this and somehow you still have arrived here which is beyond me, allow me to reiterate in hopes of clarification. In simplistic terms being sufficient is a subset or if you will a "small bubble" inside of the larger superset, necessity or "large bubble." Therefore, following the same formal logic an answer choice being "opposite" is sufficient for being "alternative." For the sake of checks and balances if you take the contrapositive of that statement, it makes perfect sense. If this still does not make sense, please refer to logic traps at the end of last lesson.
Lastly, next time you try to correct curriculum in an attempt to make yourself feel "special" or more intelligent than others or the teachers. Remember that what error you think you have discovered is not clever or insightful but rather most likely you are being too inept to understand basic foundational knowledge. Everything aside this is simply a joke and I'm teasing you. Have a good one :)
For the takeaway questions, did anyone answer the last one? I didn't realize you could "counter" a correlation. It makes sense to me that you could "counter" a causal relationship, but not a correlation, given that a correlation is a fact?? Maybe I'm misinterpreting the question/the terms?
@yasamham The answer should be no! An alternative explanation does NOT "counter" a correlation. It's a different way of explaining the correlation, but it doesn't "counter" the correlation in the sense of suggesting the correlation is not true.
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!
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.
60 comments
Timing is improving
yay, finally something that makes sense to me!
I think this will be answered in later sections, but I have seen the word "generalization" appear a lot on potential LSAT answers like this. Maybe someone could let me know is there is something specific they mean when they mention this?
@Garrett_dom I think the best way to think about it is a claim that applies to more than just specific examples.
"My brother likes swords." -- not a generalization
"Most people like swords." -- generalization
"All people like swords" -- generalization
"Children tend to like swords" -- generalization
I'm sure it can get more nuanced, because it's possible that a claim becomes a generalization depending on the context around it, but that's...generally (usually) how I think about it.
The reason I didn't choose D is because of the verbiage in the answer choice: "offering an alternate explanation of the CORRELATION cited"
I thought because of the wording in the stimulus, "caused by" was indicating a casual relationship. Therefore, I thought answer D was a trick question answer choice.
@Edbnapa Other people are saying the decline is caused by growth in government services. But the editorialist is pushing back on that and suggesting a different explanation.
A is correlated with B
Some people say: A causes B.
Editorialist says: B might cause A.
"B might cause A" is an alternate explanation for the correlation between A and B.
@Edbnapa I also made this same mistake. We have to pay attention to the crux of the passage and not what the other people were saying.
I'm tired of you going over the answer choices and being judgy about them. It makes me feel stupid
@KateA That's not our intention! J.Y. is just sharing a high-scorer's analysis of the different answers and why they're wrong or right. Is there a particular answer choice on this one that you felt this "judgy" tone? And to be clear, do you feel that this tone is suggesting judgment of viewers? Or is there some line of reasoning for a wrong answer that you felt was not addressed, and so eliminating the answer is unsatisfying? Just trying to get clear on exactly what the problem is and how it can be cleared up here or in future explanations.
@Kevin_Lin Sorry, I commented this when I was tired and in a bad mood. I guess I submitted C for my blind review and was really angry with "wow, this is so wrong I don't even know where to begin." Just felt a little condescending. But kind of a silly thing for me to nitpick about
@KateA 7Sage is quite gentle compared to the way LSAT Demon breaks down answer choices. When studying for the LSAT, expect to make over 1,000 blunders along the way
Got this right extremely quickly without using arrows.
@Feitan Right, I don't think anyone is suggesting we should draw a diagram for this question. Many explanations simply use visuals for the purpose of clarifying the logic for those who don't understand it well. But by no means should you be drawing out stuff on the vast majority of questions. Probably just 1 or 2 questions in a section are worth some kind of diagram.
took me 2 min but we still got it! You can do it lock in twin
Wahoo, I got it correct! It took me about 2 and half minutes but I was able to explain to myself why each answer choice was wrong. I believe it is a strong step in the right direction!
I knew it was either B or D. I think B confused me because of the language. I wasn't sure what counterexample really meant ("now knowing it means an example that contradicts the given statement") and thought at the time it meant that the author was providing an alternate example, similar to D. Should we consider this a missed question since it was due to a language misunderstanding?
I believe a lesson on how correlations can't have counterexamples would be very helpful because I didn't know that.
@MRod This was exactly my way of thinking too...
Been feeling a bit low since I have been struggling, not just with the material but trying to get up early in the morning to study before work then working a full shift and right back at it, but I finally got an answer right without having to do the blind review!!! I know it will take time and more practice but I just want to test good now!
@LoganHjermstad I completely understand I have been struggling to find time between school and other obligations to work on these lessons. I have been feeling behind like I should be doing more than the lessons also but I just don't have enough time.
This made me so happy to get correct. I feel like I am finally catching up!
Ok I got it right, but I have a different reasoning on how I got it
I saw it as:
Casual Argument:
Decline in n. of NGO correlates with growth or increase of governement services
Conclusion
the Increase of Governement Services correlates with decrease in voluntareerism
Answer: alternate explaination to the correlation cited in casual argument
I got it right, but I don't understand how he got the same answer with a different reasoning
I finally got it right, crying emoji*
Genuinely felt good about this one! Long time since I felt that way lol
Why is this considered a correlation phenomena when the stim says, "caused by"? I assumed this meant a direct cause and effect relationship and still got the question correct
I went a minute over and got it right. Got it reccomended for BR and got it wrong on BR because of doubt. Not the first time this has happened. Sometimes I feel like BR is pretty useless :/
@Arshavin Whenever I have a blind review recommendation I check to see if its because I got it wrong or because I spent too much time on it or even sometimes because I switched my answer too much to avoid overthinking and doubting myself.
@KayGar Hi, how do you check if it's because of too much time, getting it wrong, etc.? Can you check this before you decide if you want to do a BR?
@smallbrowngirl28 Hi! I think you can only see it once you've started the BR. At the top when it says something like this question has been flagged for BR in pink, there is a small circle with an exclamation point or something at the end of the sentence. If you hover over that circle it tells you why the question was flagged for BR.
Can “caused by” be a consistent indicator to demonstrate the causal relationship?
I.e. “This decline NGO (B) is caused by corresponding growth of gov services (A)” Therefore, anything that follows “caused by” can be interpreted in lawgic as B “caused by” A, means A causes B.
Is that universal for “caused by” being an “indicator”.
Took me 7 minutes, but I got it correct first try, and wrong in Blind review LoL. I just felt forced to choose something in Blind review..so I chose anything just to get off the screen..even though I knew none of the other answer choices were correct. Once I start PT's I hope to get much faster at questions.
Counterexample was a word I didn't know. The definition that came up: an example that shows it contradicts an idea or theory. So it's meant to disprove something or show something is wrong. So in the video, when JY says Cats are nice, and I say wait no, you're wrong, and point out that Garfield and Jerry mean-- that's a counterexample. Which is why B is wrong. The author doesn't say that the conclusion was wrong, in fact they say the conclusion might be right. That's not a counterexample. That's just being nice and curious, looking for alternative explanations.
How would be prove this causal relationship?
I chose D but B was the last answer choice I crossed out before choosing D. B was enticing but the word "counterexample" didn't fit because the author wasn't necessarily providing a counterexample (aka another causal phenomenon) they were just providing an alternative hypothesis/explanation.
@funkmastericejj I chose D as well but was also down to B and D. I couldn't necessarily cross B out like the others, but D seemed more accurate.
I narrowed it down to b and d and I pick b because honestly I thought b and d were saying the same thing
@CourtneyPierce same
D: offering an alternate explanation of the correlation cited.
The correlation cited by the question was that Government services increase, causing community services to decrease.
The editorialist suggested that it's the opposite. They did not give an alternative correlation but offered a counterexample.
@Sameer_Ahamad Whether it is the opposite or not still does not negate the fact that it is an "alternative" explanation. What you are doing here is confusing sufficiency for necessity in your futile attempt to be a smart ass. So, you have obviously overlooked the hundreds of lessons relating to sufficiency and necessity prior to this and somehow you still have arrived here which is beyond me, allow me to reiterate in hopes of clarification. In simplistic terms being sufficient is a subset or if you will a "small bubble" inside of the larger superset, necessity or "large bubble." Therefore, following the same formal logic an answer choice being "opposite" is sufficient for being "alternative." For the sake of checks and balances if you take the contrapositive of that statement, it makes perfect sense. If this still does not make sense, please refer to logic traps at the end of last lesson.
Lastly, next time you try to correct curriculum in an attempt to make yourself feel "special" or more intelligent than others or the teachers. Remember that what error you think you have discovered is not clever or insightful but rather most likely you are being too inept to understand basic foundational knowledge. Everything aside this is simply a joke and I'm teasing you. Have a good one :)
For the takeaway questions, did anyone answer the last one? I didn't realize you could "counter" a correlation. It makes sense to me that you could "counter" a causal relationship, but not a correlation, given that a correlation is a fact?? Maybe I'm misinterpreting the question/the terms?
@yasamham The answer should be no! An alternative explanation does NOT "counter" a correlation. It's a different way of explaining the correlation, but it doesn't "counter" the correlation in the sense of suggesting the correlation is not true.
Only downside was being 46 seconds over the time.