For question 4, I have a question - I got a bit confused because I thought "how do we know that for pedestrians cars driving faster is dangerous?" since we aren't supposed to use outside knowledge but rely on the premise and conclusion of the argument.
But this is not relevant to identifying whether it is argument because the point of the exercise is not to evaluate the strength but to identify the premise and the conclusion, right?
@kittenWhiskers Yes, for this exercise it's just asking us to identify the premise and conclusion. The strength of the argument and the assumptions made aren't relevant at the moment
But I think that it's good you were able to identify that
For Q2, why is the conclusion not just "Max is not guilty" but instead "his asking the police to investigate show that he is not guilty"? Wouldn't his asking the police to investigate be used as evidence for why he isn't guilty?
@anamat I am by no means an expert but I looked and could not find an answer for the question you are asking so I will try to provide one!
We are examining the relationships between statements here. The conclusion will be supported by the premises presented in the argument. The conclusion can often times be found by asking just one simple question, "Why should I believe that?", or "What evidence is given to support this statement?". In this case, the conclusion is that Max having asked the police to investigate shows that he is not guilty. Why should I believe that? Because if Max were guilty, he would not ask the police to investigate!
The argument is not a very good one, which actually often times makes the conclusion less obvious, but in this case, the idea that he would object to investigation if he were guilty is supporting the claim that he is not guilty, because he did not object to investigation.
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.
273 comments
For number 5 can the premise and conclusion be flipped around if the conclusion indicator "consequently" isn't there?
5/5 :)))))
Agh I got to in my head got 3/5, I was like for sure not all of these could be arguments! 5 got me!
I tripped up on #5. Is the conclusion saying that the store was selling t-shirts for less than the store's own prices?
@Anonymous5253 same! I think it’s saying they are selling the at or below cost
5/5 YAY!
premise: i cannot read.
reading is required for the lsat.
conclusion: therefore, i will cancel my 7sage subscription.
@yesterdayseeker LOL
5/5 YAY
5/5 woohoo!
5/5 🙏
5/5 AYEEE
For question 4, I have a question - I got a bit confused because I thought "how do we know that for pedestrians cars driving faster is dangerous?" since we aren't supposed to use outside knowledge but rely on the premise and conclusion of the argument.
But this is not relevant to identifying whether it is argument because the point of the exercise is not to evaluate the strength but to identify the premise and the conclusion, right?
@kittenWhiskers Yes, for this exercise it's just asking us to identify the premise and conclusion. The strength of the argument and the assumptions made aren't relevant at the moment
But I think that it's good you were able to identify that
5/5! Quickly scanning the question for indicator words first were key for me.
5/5!! LETS GOOO
4/5 this was rather easy to understand, for Q4 I started the conclusion at Thus rather than Long blocks which was ultimately my own brain fart.
5/5 took me a little more time, but with practice I think I should get faster
For Q2, why is the conclusion not just "Max is not guilty" but instead "his asking the police to investigate show that he is not guilty"? Wouldn't his asking the police to investigate be used as evidence for why he isn't guilty?
@anamat I am by no means an expert but I looked and could not find an answer for the question you are asking so I will try to provide one!
We are examining the relationships between statements here. The conclusion will be supported by the premises presented in the argument. The conclusion can often times be found by asking just one simple question, "Why should I believe that?", or "What evidence is given to support this statement?". In this case, the conclusion is that Max having asked the police to investigate shows that he is not guilty. Why should I believe that? Because if Max were guilty, he would not ask the police to investigate!
The argument is not a very good one, which actually often times makes the conclusion less obvious, but in this case, the idea that he would object to investigation if he were guilty is supporting the claim that he is not guilty, because he did not object to investigation.
Hope that clears it up a bit!
@EFlat10 it does thank you!!
5/5!
5/5 YAY, im finally starting to get it
5/5 BABYYYYYYYYYYYY
5/5!
5/5, thank goodness. I was worried if I was second guessing stuff but it looks like I did well
5/5 lessss gooooo
too easy rip
5/5 yuhh
5/5 LFG!