I understand that videos are helpful, but remember, if you want to be a lawyer, there will be a lot of reading. It might be a good time to practice reading now, under lower stakes situations. The stakes only get higher as time goes on (law school, bar exam, clients/work). 7Sage has a truly amazing amount of video material already. A few text articles here and there are not the end of the world. In fact, I enjoy reading through them because they are so thorough.
@aaddcc finally someone said it. all the complaining about no videos was beginning to lean onto the ungrateful side. If these concepts had videos they be like 35 seconds long on a blank screen because there's nothing to diagram out.
@aaddcc Correct! I always think this when people complain about reading, i'm like.... ummmm you do realize your going to law school to become a lawyer...
@Shannell_E'llan Literally what I've been thinking every time I see those comments. Law School isn't gonna be like watching YouTube... Practicing reading comprehension skills, even passively through these LR lessons, I know is going to be very important, not only for the RC sections, but for Law School and beyond!
#help#feedback In the last diagram, it states under Must be True "logical negation of correct answer." But, this idea is not explained in the text above. Is there a later section that explains this? Thanks!
I think they just mean that you don't need to necessarily use a different strategy than for MBT. Instead, just negate the right answer of MBT so that it becomes its logical opposite? I could be wrong tho!
It's referring to using the technique "it is not the case that" to negate the meaning of the statement. If you add the negation to the statement and it makes it so it is not true based on the info of the stimulus, then you've identified the correct answer. The purpose of negating a Must Be True statement will allow you to identify what is needed to be true that can be added to the stimulus without making the entire argument fall apart. When the argument falls apart due to the negation, you've found the right answer.
@kbblommaert968 Simply put, I think if negating something breaks the entire argument then that has to be true for the argument. That MUST BE TRUE for the argument to be valid.
I'm commenting to note how handy the last linking image is. It perfectly shows how LR is connected and how the process goes; this helps keep the previous lessons fresh in mind.
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!
Sorry, you need a subscription for that.
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.
22 comments
can someone explain the chart under the support spectrum in simple terms
@AribaHassan I think the most important takeaway is that for causal/conditional logic questions, the answer will be a MBT or must be false.
It is literally 12:12 am I am sleepy tired I have to wake up at 7:30 (not too crazy) but have hectic full focus work tomorrow --> We got this
I understand that videos are helpful, but remember, if you want to be a lawyer, there will be a lot of reading. It might be a good time to practice reading now, under lower stakes situations. The stakes only get higher as time goes on (law school, bar exam, clients/work). 7Sage has a truly amazing amount of video material already. A few text articles here and there are not the end of the world. In fact, I enjoy reading through them because they are so thorough.
@aaddcc I hate that you're right!!!
@aaddcc finally someone said it. all the complaining about no videos was beginning to lean onto the ungrateful side. If these concepts had videos they be like 35 seconds long on a blank screen because there's nothing to diagram out.
@aaddcc Correct! I always think this when people complain about reading, i'm like.... ummmm you do realize your going to law school to become a lawyer...
@Shannell_E'llan Literally what I've been thinking every time I see those comments. Law School isn't gonna be like watching YouTube... Practicing reading comprehension skills, even passively through these LR lessons, I know is going to be very important, not only for the RC sections, but for Law School and beyond!
@aaddcc I rarely watch the videos for this reason!
why are there no more videos like the foundation lessons?
@Bunnyaks fr
#feedback it would be nice if these diagrams were linked or added to the cheat sheet
#feedback videos on these theory and approach sections would be helpful!
@lillirobinson17 !!
#help#feedback In the last diagram, it states under Must be True "logical negation of correct answer." But, this idea is not explained in the text above. Is there a later section that explains this? Thanks!
I think they just mean that you don't need to necessarily use a different strategy than for MBT. Instead, just negate the right answer of MBT so that it becomes its logical opposite? I could be wrong tho!
It's referring to using the technique "it is not the case that" to negate the meaning of the statement. If you add the negation to the statement and it makes it so it is not true based on the info of the stimulus, then you've identified the correct answer. The purpose of negating a Must Be True statement will allow you to identify what is needed to be true that can be added to the stimulus without making the entire argument fall apart. When the argument falls apart due to the negation, you've found the right answer.
←s→
👍
@kbblommaert968 Simply put, I think if negating something breaks the entire argument then that has to be true for the argument. That MUST BE TRUE for the argument to be valid.
I'm commenting to note how handy the last linking image is. It perfectly shows how LR is connected and how the process goes; this helps keep the previous lessons fresh in mind.
#feedback