I have been seeing so much growth after going through the foundational concepts. It is refreshing to see my skills improve with these drills. I am excited for what is to come!
Once you really get good at identifying premises and conclusions, these questions are so incredibly easy. I'm finding it much easier to identify the context, perspective switch, and support present in the argument!
This structure makes learning this type of question so easy -- I'm nervous I won't identify the right question on the test itself, but I keep getting the questions right so I'll cross my fingers that this knowledge will stick in that larger context!!
She means that as you are reading the stimulus, you want to ask "why" each time you read a sentences. In this case, Why the trial was worthwhile? if you try, you may notice that asking "why" on the other sentences, it may lead to nothing, but this one leads you to wanting an answer: the conclusion...
These lessons with blind reviews and video explanations are remarkably helpful. These will definitely help me to identify the conclusions during the LSAT feel habitual.
Beating myself up for missing this one! I selected C rushing through. During the blind review, I correctly identified D as being the conclusion. Accuracy before Speed folks!
So far what has helped me the most in getting these questions right is by finding the conclusion in the stimulus and finding that conclusion in one of the answer choices,
i almost got tripped up on this question but i did a big brain thing by asking myself "what is the premise supporting"? I couldn't tell if the second sentence was the conclusion or the sentence after. the support of the argument cleared that up. don't think i've used that tactic before!
Identifying the conclusion above all is the key to answering these questions. Once you can differentiate between the premise, conclusion & context you will be okay.
@jenniferthorne2004 There needs to be more lessons on identifying the conclusion, its very murky from following the previous lessons which didnt explain it well enough to grasp where context begins and ends.
@AutonomousTacticalTheory I agree and I know its annoying to here, but the best thing to do is just go back and re do skill builders and just practise it more. I know it sucks and feels so horrible when going back but I re did a ton of them and found that after enough hours (only 2-3) I was much better at identifying the conclusions and the indicators that show us the obvious answers. Good luck :)
@schusterkarli487 Not sure how this will help, but for these MC questions, I put myself in the author’s place-I ask what my point is and what supports it. Reading out loud also helps, because conclusions are often more assertive, while explanations are more “here’s why.” LOL don't quote me - i am not sure how it'll work on harder convoluted questions.
Finding the conclusion and premise is very vital. It has helped me successfully answer all questions related to main conclusion. I spent 2 minutes answering these questions but at the end I was able to get them all right because I identified the conclusion and the premise.
I have been getting all these questions right so far (and often within the time margin), but find that I am not really able to identify minor vs. major premises and tend to ignore sub-conclusions.
I usually just look for the main conclusion within the stimulus. Is this a bad approach?
@Lylas123 I personally do not think it is a bad approach but you need to be careful.
If you are reading the question stem first and then reading the stimulus, you should be fine. (Because you will know it is a MC question.)
if you aren't reading the question stem and simply know it is a MC question because this is the concept we are studying right now then you should be a little worried.
You need to take in all of the information because what if it isn't a MC question? On exam day you wont know if it is or isn't until you read the question stem.
How do we know that "The penalty imposed on the company will probably have little if any effect on its behavior" is not part of the main conclusion? It seems like a necessary piece to make the main conclusion as identified in the video comprehensible.
@tarapg2901 Imo,, if you ask "why" or "how do we know", there's no information within the stimulus telling us how the penalty won't change behaviour. What the stimulus does tell us though is that the information from the trial has still led to useful info (which the last sentence/premise details)
@anamat To piggy back, I forget which lesson said this, but...
A sentence can sound like a conclusion BUT if the rest of a passage or set of premises do not support it, then it cannot be the conclusion. Remember: Arguments are premises and conclusion. The premises give support. The conclusion receives support.
The second sentence of the context makes a claim. "the penalty impoesd on the companyy will probably have little if any effect on its behavior." How do we make the distinction between this being the authors claim or context. I was stuck between C and D and eventually chose D because the premises supported it more than C but this still tripped me up.
I just gave it some more though. Actually, it's very clear now. While we don't know who made the claim/conclusion that the penalties will probably have little effect on the company's behavior, it's still something that needs support nonetheless, and it had none. ALL the premises in the stimulus supported why the trial was nonetheless worthwhile. None of them mentioned again why the penalties wouldn't do anything to the company.
We were both in the same mindset that C was definitely a conclusion (made by the author or someone we don't know). We were a little blind that there was nothing supporting it at all and should have been crossed off right away. Nonetheless, we both saw that there was plenty of support for D and that is why it must have been the main conclusion.
Note to both of us in the future: if there is any contention between two sentences possibly being the conclusion, look for which one has no support at all. If both of them have support, look at which one has the MOST support funneled to it.
Colin, you're helping me out again! This was the first question I got wrong - I assumed that C was the conclusion and D was the sub-conclusion. Your explanation makes total sense tho and I will definitely keep it in mind as I progress throughout this section and PT's.
It makes me very happy that I could help, Sehar! :) If you're at all interested in creating a study group together—since it seems we're in the same place—I'd be happy to answer some questions or bounce some questions off you if I come into any trouble. Just let me know, and I can give you my email.
99 comments
i feel like i'm sniffing out conclusions like a bloodhound now
for real! these lessons are so useful.
I have been seeing so much growth after going through the foundational concepts. It is refreshing to see my skills improve with these drills. I am excited for what is to come!
same!
SAME the foundations felt like the dark ages for me lol
Getting all these questions right in this module!!! Congrats to everyone working so hard - this stuff ain't easy!!
I have also gotten every one of these right. This question took me 25 seconds. It feels so formulaic at this point, very encouraging.
I wish all questions were Main Conclusion! Lol
edit: why did I ever comment this MC is literally one of my worst question types as of August lmfao
@SusanLeifker LITERALLY
Once you really get good at identifying premises and conclusions, these questions are so incredibly easy. I'm finding it much easier to identify the context, perspective switch, and support present in the argument!
This structure makes learning this type of question so easy -- I'm nervous I won't identify the right question on the test itself, but I keep getting the questions right so I'll cross my fingers that this knowledge will stick in that larger context!!
It is so helpful to ask yourself "why?" If you can find the answer to that then you have identified the conclusion and supporting premise(s)
Can you elaborate? Or anyone? What should I be asking "why" to? #feedback #help
She means that as you are reading the stimulus, you want to ask "why" each time you read a sentences. In this case, Why the trial was worthwhile? if you try, you may notice that asking "why" on the other sentences, it may lead to nothing, but this one leads you to wanting an answer: the conclusion...
These lessons with blind reviews and video explanations are remarkably helpful. These will definitely help me to identify the conclusions during the LSAT feel habitual.
Beating myself up for missing this one! I selected C rushing through. During the blind review, I correctly identified D as being the conclusion. Accuracy before Speed folks!
I get you! I’ve been trying to mix up doing some for accuracy and some for speed but it has been so hard to combine the two
So far what has helped me the most in getting these questions right is by finding the conclusion in the stimulus and finding that conclusion in one of the answer choices,
hot tip:
i almost got tripped up on this question but i did a big brain thing by asking myself "what is the premise supporting"? I couldn't tell if the second sentence was the conclusion or the sentence after. the support of the argument cleared that up. don't think i've used that tactic before!
Identifying the conclusion above all is the key to answering these questions. Once you can differentiate between the premise, conclusion & context you will be okay.
i was dumb here and didn't read through all the questions in an attempt to lower my time. got it right on blind review
take a shot of water everytime u hear cookie-cutter. You're gonna be so hydrated
HAHA FINALLY! got one correct AND under time!
The conclusion is this:
If you had one sentence to take away/get straight to the point...it would be the conclusion.
I am getting all these questions wrong in this module. Help!
I would recommend going back to the Arguments module in the Foundations section, I found it really helpful for all the main conclusion questions!
@jenniferthorne2004 There needs to be more lessons on identifying the conclusion, its very murky from following the previous lessons which didnt explain it well enough to grasp where context begins and ends.
@AutonomousTacticalTheory I agree and I know its annoying to here, but the best thing to do is just go back and re do skill builders and just practise it more. I know it sucks and feels so horrible when going back but I re did a ton of them and found that after enough hours (only 2-3) I was much better at identifying the conclusions and the indicators that show us the obvious answers. Good luck :)
@schusterkarli487 Not sure how this will help, but for these MC questions, I put myself in the author’s place-I ask what my point is and what supports it. Reading out loud also helps, because conclusions are often more assertive, while explanations are more “here’s why.” LOL don't quote me - i am not sure how it'll work on harder convoluted questions.
@schusterkarli487 emphasizing all these responses and also recommending reviewing the referentials section as well. you got this!
Finding the conclusion and premise is very vital. It has helped me successfully answer all questions related to main conclusion. I spent 2 minutes answering these questions but at the end I was able to get them all right because I identified the conclusion and the premise.
I feel the same! These practice questions have helped me identify the main conclusion so easily!
I have been getting all these questions right so far (and often within the time margin), but find that I am not really able to identify minor vs. major premises and tend to ignore sub-conclusions.
I usually just look for the main conclusion within the stimulus. Is this a bad approach?
@Lylas123 I personally do not think it is a bad approach but you need to be careful.
If you are reading the question stem first and then reading the stimulus, you should be fine. (Because you will know it is a MC question.)
if you aren't reading the question stem and simply know it is a MC question because this is the concept we are studying right now then you should be a little worried.
You need to take in all of the information because what if it isn't a MC question? On exam day you wont know if it is or isn't until you read the question stem.
How do we know that "The penalty imposed on the company will probably have little if any effect on its behavior" is not part of the main conclusion? It seems like a necessary piece to make the main conclusion as identified in the video comprehensible.
@tarapg2901 Imo,, if you ask "why" or "how do we know", there's no information within the stimulus telling us how the penalty won't change behaviour. What the stimulus does tell us though is that the information from the trial has still led to useful info (which the last sentence/premise details)
@anamat To piggy back, I forget which lesson said this, but...
A sentence can sound like a conclusion BUT if the rest of a passage or set of premises do not support it, then it cannot be the conclusion. Remember: Arguments are premises and conclusion. The premises give support. The conclusion receives support.
Always highlight the different parts! I underline what I think may be the conclusion as I am going through and it helps SO much!!!
I totally agree! after highlighting the conclusion it makes answering the questions go by much faster!
The second sentence of the context makes a claim. "the penalty impoesd on the companyy will probably have little if any effect on its behavior." How do we make the distinction between this being the authors claim or context. I was stuck between C and D and eventually chose D because the premises supported it more than C but this still tripped me up.
I just gave it some more though. Actually, it's very clear now. While we don't know who made the claim/conclusion that the penalties will probably have little effect on the company's behavior, it's still something that needs support nonetheless, and it had none. ALL the premises in the stimulus supported why the trial was nonetheless worthwhile. None of them mentioned again why the penalties wouldn't do anything to the company.
We were both in the same mindset that C was definitely a conclusion (made by the author or someone we don't know). We were a little blind that there was nothing supporting it at all and should have been crossed off right away. Nonetheless, we both saw that there was plenty of support for D and that is why it must have been the main conclusion.
Note to both of us in the future: if there is any contention between two sentences possibly being the conclusion, look for which one has no support at all. If both of them have support, look at which one has the MOST support funneled to it.
I'm feeling the same as you. I've got all these questions right so far, but this one felt like a gamble between C and D
Colin, you're helping me out again! This was the first question I got wrong - I assumed that C was the conclusion and D was the sub-conclusion. Your explanation makes total sense tho and I will definitely keep it in mind as I progress throughout this section and PT's.
It makes me very happy that I could help, Sehar! :) If you're at all interested in creating a study group together—since it seems we're in the same place—I'd be happy to answer some questions or bounce some questions off you if I come into any trouble. Just let me know, and I can give you my email.
count me in if you're still making a group!
The premise vs conclusion idea helps so much with these questions!
i got this one wrong because i confused context for conclusion. this explanation was useful to show how the conclusion will appear for MC/MP
I use a code to keep track of and check my identifications:
Yellow - Conclusion
Orange - Context
Pink - Premises
Underline - transition words (but, however, etc.)
I don't highlight the first time I read it, but on the second pass. Might help!
wasn't spooked this time since the answer was D instead of A. Guess thats how long it took to read through the "stimulus", "stem", and options A-D