I am learning with each lesson I am more intuitive than lawgic. However, considering the lawgic framework allows me to confirm my intuition. sips coffee
These conditional chains have never made sense to me. I feel like I take more time trying to figure out how to set up the chain than just letting it click in my head and moving to the answer choices. Anyone else?
same. Sometimes they do and sometimes they don't but I certainly don't try to implement them because if I get something wrong with them then it could mess up my whole answer! I try to pay attention to just how he dissects these passages and it's helped to just pick up a pattern. reminder that some methods just might not work for you and thats okay. rather than wasting time forcing it or confusing yourself even more, rely on what you know to be true about yourself. Hope this helps -someone who's in the same boat as you Lol
I think the main reason for drawing out chains is for when you find that nothing or very little is clicking in your head. Also, it guarantees that by writing out the complex argument simply in logic, it reduces risk of misunderstanding the argument through retaining it all in your head. Just depends on your level of comprehension and confidence! I didn't need to translate into logic to get the question right. But when I blind reviewed, I mapped out the logic to confirm if my answer selection was correct :)
I would suggest to maybe review the logic/conditional chain section in the foundations section! Something I have found is that a good amount of LR questions have some element of conditional reasoning. Purposefully mapping out conditional statements, even if it may seem simple or redundant, will make you more comfortable in creating these important links during testing conditions!
Sometimes, I like to drill untimed with conditional reasoning tags. Within these drills I take the time to map out conditional statements and rewatch the explanation, regardless if I got the question right, to further understand Lawgic!
Ugh I'm so annoyed... If I were approaching this answer intuitively without thinking in lawgic terms A would have been the obvious answer, but it gets so convoluted when I try to diagram and end up tripping myself up over the all before some issue (which I now understand why it's not applicable here).
I noticed something in this video that I had not noticed before. J.Y. is reading the AC's starting in the middle with the word "if" and it makes it a bit easier to understand more quickly. At least it did for me, and I would imagine it does for him as well, which is why he reads it that way. The quicker, the better.
I hope this helps someone. I will use this strategy moving forward.
Edit: I wrote this before getting to the end of the video...and of course he pointed it out! lol
most people eat grapes. most people eat strawberries. therefore, some people eat grapes and strawberries. this is something I learned from the LSAT Trainer book :)
I struggled at first with this new format in comparison to V1, but now tend to like it better. What might help in the struggle of not seeing a preview of all the answer choices beforehand is anticipating what the right answer choice will look like. Then, at the bottom of the video, it shows all the timing marks of each answer choice that will be answered such as "a", "b", "c" ect. After anticipating correct answer choice, I click on each timing mark that previews that letter answer choice before it is marked on and see if it matches to my anticipated answer choice. Then I watched the video as normal and click the next answer choice (if the other one was not the labeled correct one). For me I find this learning method to improve my skill to anticipate answer choices and "go hunting" and being able to look at an answer choice and eliminate it one by one with confidence.
Just above the video, there is a button that says "quick view." If you click on it, you'll be able to preview the passage, question, and answer choices.
Are there other people getting these questions right, but doing the actually work completely different from the teacher? I got the past questions right but my work is so different it's concerning me haha :
Nah don't let it concern you! Everybody learns differently, there's not one "right" way to go about it. I have my own way that's been working really well for me.
is there a way to break down questions like these without writing out the logic? these explanations are all finding the answer by using the logic chain, is that the best way to find the answers
@wendyzgod I break them down in my head as I'm reading it that way it doesn't take 5 minutes and you don't need to thoroughly go through each answer choice you can just read through all of them for the most right sounding answers and start evaluating those
I find it much harder to pay attention if I am not given the answers to the stimulus beforehand. I want to know what my thinking would lead me to and whether I am right or wrong I can apply his reasoning to give me a better perspective. I am not going to spent 5 minutes diagramming on an actual exam but I would be able to apply broad thinking patterns.
I've been thinking about this question, and feel like if I were to see it under time pressure I would translate the second half of it differently in my head.
Listing --> easier to limit --> some people would do so --> they would be healthier.
I know JY's explanation contains far more clarity, but I don't feel that I would replicate that more-intricate-than-not level of logic under timed conditions. Does my translation work? Is it a bad habit that will punish me in other questions?
I had the same thought and treated this question more like causal logic. I went:
exact caffeine --> limit (/eliminate) --> many people --> better health. That led me to A without any doubt.
Here's the thing. You got the right answer, and, I'm assuming, the way you wrote your chain didn't allow for the other answer choices to corrupt it. That's great! That means you understood the question. I wouldn't overthink it. If you are worried, I would do a MBT drill on the hardest setting and see if you encounter the issue of incorrectly translating and go from there.
95 comments
I am learning with each lesson I am more intuitive than lawgic. However, considering the lawgic framework allows me to confirm my intuition. sips coffee
same
does anyone feel like LR suddenly got difficult after we moved from most strongly supported to most likely to be true?
Yes, 100%!!
extremely
conditional logic q's like this make me want to crash out sometimes
Note to self: Many translates into some
These conditional chains have never made sense to me. I feel like I take more time trying to figure out how to set up the chain than just letting it click in my head and moving to the answer choices. Anyone else?
me as well.
same. Sometimes they do and sometimes they don't but I certainly don't try to implement them because if I get something wrong with them then it could mess up my whole answer! I try to pay attention to just how he dissects these passages and it's helped to just pick up a pattern. reminder that some methods just might not work for you and thats okay. rather than wasting time forcing it or confusing yourself even more, rely on what you know to be true about yourself. Hope this helps -someone who's in the same boat as you Lol
I think the main reason for drawing out chains is for when you find that nothing or very little is clicking in your head. Also, it guarantees that by writing out the complex argument simply in logic, it reduces risk of misunderstanding the argument through retaining it all in your head. Just depends on your level of comprehension and confidence! I didn't need to translate into logic to get the question right. But when I blind reviewed, I mapped out the logic to confirm if my answer selection was correct :)
I would suggest to maybe review the logic/conditional chain section in the foundations section! Something I have found is that a good amount of LR questions have some element of conditional reasoning. Purposefully mapping out conditional statements, even if it may seem simple or redundant, will make you more comfortable in creating these important links during testing conditions!
Sometimes, I like to drill untimed with conditional reasoning tags. Within these drills I take the time to map out conditional statements and rewatch the explanation, regardless if I got the question right, to further understand Lawgic!
Ugh I'm so annoyed... If I were approaching this answer intuitively without thinking in lawgic terms A would have been the obvious answer, but it gets so convoluted when I try to diagram and end up tripping myself up over the all before some issue (which I now understand why it's not applicable here).
I noticed something in this video that I had not noticed before. J.Y. is reading the AC's starting in the middle with the word "if" and it makes it a bit easier to understand more quickly. At least it did for me, and I would imagine it does for him as well, which is why he reads it that way. The quicker, the better.
I hope this helps someone. I will use this strategy moving forward.
Edit: I wrote this before getting to the end of the video...and of course he pointed it out! lol
@StanHolt I noticed this too, it helped me a lot as well.
Might be beneficial to see the answers before going over them. Maybe not.
something i learned that may be helpful:
some + some = no inference can be made
some + most = no inference can be made
most + most = an inference of "some" can be made
"some" simply means that there is more than zero – "most" means more than half. most does NOT rule out all, we cannot infer that
I am not sure exactly what you mean by most + most, but if it is a unidirectional chain then no inference can be drawn.
A most B most C. No inference.
A -most-> B, A -most-> C. We can draw the inference
B some C
Additionally,
A -most-> B --> C. This concludes that A some C.
Note: I tried to indicate that the some relations are bi-conditional but my computer won't let me for some reason
what i meant is like:
most people eat grapes. most people eat strawberries. therefore, some people eat grapes and strawberries. this is something I learned from the LSAT Trainer book :)
Ah yes! Exactly right. Best of luck to you and sending good vibes, we got this!
I did this without writing out any logic by remembering many implies some, and carefully parsing out the grammar and meaning of the stimulus.
I struggled at first with this new format in comparison to V1, but now tend to like it better. What might help in the struggle of not seeing a preview of all the answer choices beforehand is anticipating what the right answer choice will look like. Then, at the bottom of the video, it shows all the timing marks of each answer choice that will be answered such as "a", "b", "c" ect. After anticipating correct answer choice, I click on each timing mark that previews that letter answer choice before it is marked on and see if it matches to my anticipated answer choice. Then I watched the video as normal and click the next answer choice (if the other one was not the labeled correct one). For me I find this learning method to improve my skill to anticipate answer choices and "go hunting" and being able to look at an answer choice and eliminate it one by one with confidence.
#feedback I reallyyyy dont like that the answer choices are hidden. I want to be able to guess before the correct answer is revealed.
Just above the video, there is a button that says "quick view." If you click on it, you'll be able to preview the passage, question, and answer choices.
Thank youuu <3
Are there other people getting these questions right, but doing the actually work completely different from the teacher? I got the past questions right but my work is so different it's concerning me haha :
Nah don't let it concern you! Everybody learns differently, there's not one "right" way to go about it. I have my own way that's been working really well for me.
We're going to get this!!
finally got a MSS question right 😄
pretty sure Coca Cola now displays caffeine amount on the can... at least here
is there a way to break down questions like these without writing out the logic? these explanations are all finding the answer by using the logic chain, is that the best way to find the answers
I feel like we can have a bit more content combine grammar and lawgic to help us with these parse the question
im getting the questions right but im not analyzing/breaking them down like is done in the video lessons. i hope that will come with time
@wendyzgod I break them down in my head as I'm reading it that way it doesn't take 5 minutes and you don't need to thoroughly go through each answer choice you can just read through all of them for the most right sounding answers and start evaluating those
I find it much harder to pay attention if I am not given the answers to the stimulus beforehand. I want to know what my thinking would lead me to and whether I am right or wrong I can apply his reasoning to give me a better perspective. I am not going to spent 5 minutes diagramming on an actual exam but I would be able to apply broad thinking patterns.
@BassamAziz i just learned about the show question button and it will show stim/ac's that way i can do it before watching the video
This made more sense than the last one
@TeklaCo definitely agree
This question type will be the hardest thing for me on the LSAT.
@JRamirez imagine lsat writers are looking at our comments to know which questions we struggle with more
@JeromedoesLSATPREP yikesss, if they are, hopefully its for our benefit lol
#help
I've been thinking about this question, and feel like if I were to see it under time pressure I would translate the second half of it differently in my head.
Listing --> easier to limit --> some people would do so --> they would be healthier.
I know JY's explanation contains far more clarity, but I don't feel that I would replicate that more-intricate-than-not level of logic under timed conditions. Does my translation work? Is it a bad habit that will punish me in other questions?
I had the same thought and treated this question more like causal logic. I went:
exact caffeine --> limit (/eliminate) --> many people --> better health. That led me to A without any doubt.
Here's the thing. You got the right answer, and, I'm assuming, the way you wrote your chain didn't allow for the other answer choices to corrupt it. That's great! That means you understood the question. I wouldn't overthink it. If you are worried, I would do a MBT drill on the hardest setting and see if you encounter the issue of incorrectly translating and go from there.
You got this!
This is getting fun!
I wish there had been a mini drill to let us try this one before it was covered
There has always been a quick view option and then you can just click answers at the bottom to see if you got the question correct.