Got it in like 40 seconds but I've seen it before so idk if that is a point towards me or not. It does feel like the right answer tends to be one that is simple, and can't really be argued against. Trim the fat or what have you, and the least wrong answer reveals itself by process of elimination
Some thing I learned outside of 7Sage that really helped me identify an author’s premise and conclusion on the LSAT is the “so” test.
How it works: Take two claims and place the word “so” between them. The “so” should create A logical sentence, with the first sentence giving support to the second.
Premise → so → Conclusion → usually makes logical sense.
Conclusion → so → Premise → usually does not make sense. (No Support)
If you are unsure, say the sentence out loud. The direction that sounds natural usually reveals the author’s conclusion.
@GabrielaH There’s a YouTube channel called Insight LSAT. It’s the first video under Courses, you’ll find all their LSAT videos there. They’re pretty helpful, but a little vague compared to 7Sage.
Definitely one of the harder ones for MC hitherto. Once everything linked up the question was quite easy though, although i took quite some time to complete this.
Does anyone else notice that the Blind Review tells you if you got the answer wrong or not by the "Suggested for Blind Review" thing? It kind of defeats the purpose of Blind Review
I think it finally clicked for me on how to break down the stimuli. Not surprisingly, but I really tried to focus on how the narrator breaks down the stimuli (identifying structure and grammar) in a way that kind of mimics him. Talked to myself about why each word or phrase matters and who supports who. Saw the "thus" and almost went for it because well, it was the trap. But I always try to question myself, "okay is that really the conclusion?" and just glance over the rest of the stimuli to confirm my guess. I reminded myself to check each phrases structure and identify its importance (p or another c, or if it was a p, and another p). Which allowed me to figure out why the "wise" part was the main conc, and then used referential phrasing to answer A. Note it was a bit time consuming to break it down like that but it helped.
140 comments
Got it in like 40 seconds but I've seen it before so idk if that is a point towards me or not. It does feel like the right answer tends to be one that is simple, and can't really be argued against. Trim the fat or what have you, and the least wrong answer reveals itself by process of elimination
man, stupid trick
I was doing so well then I fell for the intended trap! I'm still very happy and confident however
Slowly gaining confidence
yay! taking a moment to distinguish premise and conclusion was def helpful to avoid the trap
didn't fall for the trap and got it in 26 seconds lfg
FAHHH, i was on a roll but fell for the trap on this one
@AssumptionBandit me toooo
I fell for the trick :'(, but I now understand so I guess that's something
Getting better! One foot in front of the other...
Some thing I learned outside of 7Sage that really helped me identify an author’s premise and conclusion on the LSAT is the “so” test.
How it works: Take two claims and place the word “so” between them. The “so” should create A logical sentence, with the first sentence giving support to the second.
Premise → so → Conclusion → usually makes logical sense.
Conclusion → so → Premise → usually does not make sense. (No Support)
If you are unsure, say the sentence out loud. The direction that sounds natural usually reveals the author’s conclusion.
@David77 where is this lesson to look at it?
@GabrielaH There’s a YouTube channel called Insight LSAT. It’s the first video under Courses, you’ll find all their LSAT videos there. They’re pretty helpful, but a little vague compared to 7Sage.
@David77 thank you so much!
this one was tricky, but I got it right yayaya! :)
Got this one and all the ones before right because every time I come across a sentence that I suspect is the conclusion, I ask myself why?*
Doesn't have a strong why.
The last sentence has stronger evidence that answers the why.
Whoops picked A but got right on BR
I FELL FOR THE TRAP!!! AHHHHHHHH XD. Note: I got it on the BR :D
OH LORD, whyyyy I fell for the trick but learn and adapt and it will become easier
Definitely one of the harder ones for MC hitherto. Once everything linked up the question was quite easy though, although i took quite some time to complete this.
I fell for the trick crying emoji*
Did I think the conclusion indicator was too obvious? Yes
Did I contemplate that AC E might be too obvious and leading me to a trap? Yes
Despite this, did I fall for the trap? Yes 😭
Just when I gain a bit of confidence this test humbles me every single time lol
Does anyone else notice that the Blind Review tells you if you got the answer wrong or not by the "Suggested for Blind Review" thing? It kind of defeats the purpose of Blind Review
I fell for the trap, but I understand clearly now.
Got it right then fell for the trap on the blind review.
bruh
I almost chose E, but I recognized that green carnations being difficult to grow was a sub-conclusion, not the actual conclusion!!
I think it finally clicked for me on how to break down the stimuli. Not surprisingly, but I really tried to focus on how the narrator breaks down the stimuli (identifying structure and grammar) in a way that kind of mimics him. Talked to myself about why each word or phrase matters and who supports who. Saw the "thus" and almost went for it because well, it was the trap. But I always try to question myself, "okay is that really the conclusion?" and just glance over the rest of the stimuli to confirm my guess. I reminded myself to check each phrases structure and identify its importance (p or another c, or if it was a p, and another p). Which allowed me to figure out why the "wise" part was the main conc, and then used referential phrasing to answer A. Note it was a bit time consuming to break it down like that but it helped.