Subscription pricing
Hi Guys,
In the P2 , line 25-32 , I am assuming that structure means physical properties[like homogeneous,network like,granular..etc] .
Admin edit: Please review our forum rules. Posting licensed LSAC materials is against our TOS.
https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-1-section-1-passage-2-passage/
My question is why cant we think that Biochemists were not interested in structure aka physical properties of the protoplasm so they stood apart from the debate(among the biochemists) over whether protoplasm is homogeneous,network-like, granular, or foamlike .
It is another way of saying that is the debate(among biochemists) didnot happen.
Then Next line meant Biochemists' interest was in the chemical nature of the protoplasm . Why cant we say both these statements were said of Biochemists? It can happen that the biochemists had a disinterest in the physical properties[structure] of protoplasm but they wanted to study chemical characteristics of protoplasm.
Please Help me out! I am in a soup.
Admin note: edited title for formatting
0
8 comments
Hi @akikookmt881 ,
Is this the correct structure of this passage? Could you pls review it ?
P1 : General theory thesis vs anti-thesis
P2 : Specific example Cytologists vs Biochemists over a specific issue
P3 : Cytologists and biochemists condescended each other in general.
P4 : Transformation of both the disciplines and final synthesis
P5 : Conclusion : Competition between thesis and anti-thesis is good.
@simranjitstarshine891 I understood your point well. I went through the J.Y. 's explanation again and i found i misinterpreted the explanation of the Q11 . But now my understanding is crystal clear.
Thank you so much for bring me out from the confusion :) . And I am sorry for quoting the lines directly from the PT. I will take care about this rule while asking my doubt.
@simranjitstarshine891 said:
@akikookmt881 Yes, I agree to your point. While explaining the passage , JY interpreted the 'they' as Biochemists but while explaining one of the questions eg Q 11 ,he mentioned they as cytologists.
I didn't understand that Q 11 explanation.
Hi @simranjitstarshine891,
J.Y. did not say that "they" referred to cytologists in Q11.
Do you understand what the sentence "Also, they...." (Line 25) is talking about? It says that biochemists ("they") "stood apart from" the debate. In other words, biochemists did not participate in the debate. So who were having the debate? We can infer from the passage that cytologists were having the debate. That is what J.Y. is saying.
@akikookmt881 Yes, I agree to your point. While explaining the passage , JY interpreted the 'they' as Biochemists but while explaining one of the questions eg Q 11 ,he mentioned they as cytologists.
I didn't understand that Q 11 explanation.
@simranjitstarshine891 said:
@simranjitstarshine891 I was not sure about this rule.i didn't want to offend anyone.
Where can I post my passage specific doubts then?
If I don't mention the line, I will not be express my doubts in that line. As those are related to a specific part of the passage.
Sorry for the frustration! But we're very strict about this. You mentioned the lines in the passage, so I think users would know where to look for. You can also paraphrase the sentences :smile:
Anyways, if you have seen JY's video explanation of this specific part. In that he mentions about cytologists instead of biochemists.last line is attributed to biochemists but second last line is attributed to cytologists. My doubt is why can't I say 2nd last line is attributed to biochemists Instead of cytologists.
I'm sorry, but I don't get your question. By "second last line," do you mean the sentence starting from the line 25 ("Also, they....")? If so, in the video, J.Y. says "they meaning the biochemist" (10:06) and "they, biochemists" (10:44) pointing to "they" on the line 25.
@simranjitstarshine891 I was not sure about this rule.i didn't want to offend anyone.
Where can I post my passage specific doubts then?
If I don't mention the line, I will not be express my doubts in that line. As those are related to a specific part of the passage.
Anyways, if you have seen JY's video explanation of this specific part. In that he mentions about cytologists instead of biochemists.last line is attributed to biochemists but second last line is attributed to cytologists. My doubt is why can't I say 2nd last line is attributed to biochemists Instead of cytologists.
@simranjitstarshine891 said:
My question is why cant we think that Biochemists were not interested in structure aka physical properties of the protoplasm so they stood apart from the debate(among the biochemists) over whether protoplasm is homogeneous,network-like, granular, or foamlike .
It is another way of saying that is the debate(among biochemists) didnot happen.
Then Next line meant Biochemists' interest was in the chemical nature of the protoplasm . Why cant we say both these statements were said of Biochemists? It can happen that the biochemists had a disinterest in the physical properties[structure] of protoplasm but they wanted to study chemical characteristics of protoplasm.
Your reading seems spot on... What's confusing you?
I'm sure there is a rule against posting direct quotes from PTs, as they are copyrighted... just wanted to let you know.