Is it correct that on the LSAT, what makes something a conclusion is the author's intent to prove it, rather than just the logical relationship between statements?
In other words, does a word like "therefore" not just indicate a conclusion, but actually create the conclusion by demonstrating the author's intent to argue for that claim?
For example, without "therefore" or similar indicators, a passage might just be presenting facts with no argumentative structure—even if we could theoretically invent premises that would support one of those facts.
For the two i didn't answer or missed, I was analyzing the strength of the argument instead of just identifying the premise and conclusion. I need to follow instructions better
Question 5 demonstrates a weak argument because the conclusion could have stated the shirts could not be sold at less than the stores price, but it also could have stated that shirts could not be sold at more than the stores price in order for the premise to maintain strong assumption, correct?
Man, I could be a future a LSAT test writer! Hopefully someone understood that question haha.
Could you say that "Train service suffers when a railroad combines" is a supporting conclusion? It is not the Main Conclusion. But a conclusion that stands on the MC "Therefore, if..."
Just a helpful tip, if you guys see words/phrases like "therefore", "thus", "because of this", the conclusion more often than not comes after these words and phrases. Those signify "author opinion," which is more often than not what the "goal" or "conclusion" is, at least in these instances and practice problems I have interacted with. Hope this helps!
5/5!! Got tripped up a bit but my main focus was to "get to the point". I then back tracked and located the premises by asking "why should I believe this claim" and it allowed to me to locate the premises and get through this exercise swiftly! Attacking premises and conclusions has always been difficult for me, but the way that this course is set up is really helping me learn efficiently.
I unfortunately got tripped up with the quiz instructions and was suspicious of every question being an argument trap. Meaning its going to use the indicator words to trick me into thinking its an argument, but my mistake was trying to analyze the argument to identify one. Wrong pattern of thinking and it led to me being unnesccesarily confused and skeptical.
got a 5/5 this has already helped me so much and I think by the time I take my LSAT I should be able to hit my goal score or higher. It has for sure gave me a boost of confidence. Hoping the same happens for reading comprehension.
So does it ever really matter if a passage is an argument or not? Will any questions ask, "Is this an argument?" I am stuck more on that than identifying what is a premise and what is a conclusion.
I know "Consequently" is a strong conclusion indicator but for question 5 i flipped the premise and conclusion bc it made more sense to me that customers being able to buy shirts at less than the store's cost would result in neither making profit or breaking even ..
Q2. Not sure exactly how much it matters, but should "his asking the police to investigate" be considered conclusion or premise? Because it is communicating to us that he asked the police, something we didn't know before.
Premise- If Max were guilty, he would not ask the police to investigate.
Intermediate Conclusion- Therefore, his asking the police to investigate shows that he is not guilty.
Main (Implied) Conclusion- Max is not guilty
Because the premise is a conditional statement, the second sentence does the work of being supported by the premise and supporting that Max isn't guilty...
Would #2 be considered a valid argument in the sense that the premise states if he were guilty, he would've gone to the cops but he didn't so he must've been innocent?
In this skill builder I was also trying to assess the merit and relative strength of the arguments. Did anyone else find that the bulk of these arguments are weak (excluding Q1) and have tons of room for assumption.
I originally thought Question 3 was an argument, but when I looked at the first claim it seemed to have nothing to do with argument, so I said it wasn't an argument. UGGH, I should have just left my original answer. 4/5
0
Topics
PT Questions
Select Preptest
You've discovered a premium feature!
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!
Subscribers can learn all the LSAT secrets.
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.
224 comments
5/5 lets goooo
can someone explain why these two sentences are part of the premise and not support.
Gerald cannot distinguish between green and brown.
By dividing its attention between its freight and commuter customers, a railroad serves neither particularly well.
Is it correct that on the LSAT, what makes something a conclusion is the author's intent to prove it, rather than just the logical relationship between statements?
In other words, does a word like "therefore" not just indicate a conclusion, but actually create the conclusion by demonstrating the author's intent to argue for that claim?
For example, without "therefore" or similar indicators, a passage might just be presenting facts with no argumentative structure—even if we could theoretically invent premises that would support one of those facts.
For the two i didn't answer or missed, I was analyzing the strength of the argument instead of just identifying the premise and conclusion. I need to follow instructions better
finally got all of them right for once
Question 5 demonstrates a weak argument because the conclusion could have stated the shirts could not be sold at less than the stores price, but it also could have stated that shirts could not be sold at more than the stores price in order for the premise to maintain strong assumption, correct?
Man, I could be a future a LSAT test writer! Hopefully someone understood that question haha.
Could you say that "Train service suffers when a railroad combines" is a supporting conclusion? It is not the Main Conclusion. But a conclusion that stands on the MC "Therefore, if..."
Just a helpful tip, if you guys see words/phrases like "therefore", "thus", "because of this", the conclusion more often than not comes after these words and phrases. Those signify "author opinion," which is more often than not what the "goal" or "conclusion" is, at least in these instances and practice problems I have interacted with. Hope this helps!
5/5 love the get to the point and then why should I believe this "point"
5/5!! Got tripped up a bit but my main focus was to "get to the point". I then back tracked and located the premises by asking "why should I believe this claim" and it allowed to me to locate the premises and get through this exercise swiftly! Attacking premises and conclusions has always been difficult for me, but the way that this course is set up is really helping me learn efficiently.
I unfortunately got tripped up with the quiz instructions and was suspicious of every question being an argument trap. Meaning its going to use the indicator words to trick me into thinking its an argument, but my mistake was trying to analyze the argument to identify one. Wrong pattern of thinking and it led to me being unnesccesarily confused and skeptical.
got a 5/5 this has already helped me so much and I think by the time I take my LSAT I should be able to hit my goal score or higher. It has for sure gave me a boost of confidence. Hoping the same happens for reading comprehension.
So does it ever really matter if a passage is an argument or not? Will any questions ask, "Is this an argument?" I am stuck more on that than identifying what is a premise and what is a conclusion.
I know "Consequently" is a strong conclusion indicator but for question 5 i flipped the premise and conclusion bc it made more sense to me that customers being able to buy shirts at less than the store's cost would result in neither making profit or breaking even ..
Q2. Not sure exactly how much it matters, but should "his asking the police to investigate" be considered conclusion or premise? Because it is communicating to us that he asked the police, something we didn't know before.
I was confused by Q2, but I decided on this:
Premise- If Max were guilty, he would not ask the police to investigate.
Intermediate Conclusion- Therefore, his asking the police to investigate shows that he is not guilty.
Main (Implied) Conclusion- Max is not guilty
Because the premise is a conditional statement, the second sentence does the work of being supported by the premise and supporting that Max isn't guilty...
correct me if I'm wrong, please....
Question 4 Almost got me hehe but we 5/5 lezzz goo!!
4/5 . Question 4 is tricky
5/5 lets gooo 180 LSAT
5/5 yipeee
5/5 lets goooooo
Would #2 be considered a valid argument in the sense that the premise states if he were guilty, he would've gone to the cops but he didn't so he must've been innocent?
In this skill builder I was also trying to assess the merit and relative strength of the arguments. Did anyone else find that the bulk of these arguments are weak (excluding Q1) and have tons of room for assumption.
I am a little confused about question 3, the way it read to me was that every statement was a claim in itself.
I originally thought Question 3 was an argument, but when I looked at the first claim it seemed to have nothing to do with argument, so I said it wasn't an argument. UGGH, I should have just left my original answer. 4/5