Just a general clarification question, what is the difference between causal relationship and conditional relationship when reading the stim and trying to understand it?
@DavesHotChkn A conditional logic is If A then B (A -> B). While casual is A causes B (A -> B) but you can also do B is caused by A (B-> A). Usually I would read it and say this is due to x1 and leads to x2... Since a phenomena happened caused another.
@amhuynh I think it is confusing because the "When" in sentence 2 signals a sufficient condition is about to be stated, "over nutrification of estuary waters" and thereby "algae proliferates" is the necessary condition. If you take the contrapositive, it looks very similar to (D).
@ak2 For me, when I read it, the "When" was not an indicator. For two reasons: (1) looking at the stim as a whole, you notice that they are chaining each subject in the sentence ( [a] est caused by (->) [b] overnutrified caused by (->) [c] algae proliferation (->) [d] abundant, rich food leads to toxicity to most fish. The conclusion is that most fish die because of est, a->d.
We can also infer b -> d.
(2) When I am looking for conditional logic, it should come in an if-then statement, but the second sentence said "as a result", which is a causal indicator.
@JacobA04 i don't think so because sewage might just be sewage. I immediately ruled that answer choice out because in compared to fish that were polluted in another way, which is not even mentioned in the stimulus. We are only talking about one fish population
@SheridanMcGadden I don't know if this helps but I've been viewing the questions before hand and going through them on my own, and then watching the explanation. Unsure if that is what you were getting at, but it was a frustration for me for a time.
@SheridanMcGadden Underneath the title "Lesson 7 - Coastal Estuaries" there is an eye next to "show question" that you can click on to view the question. This option is under all lesson titles.
I've lived on a lake my whole life. Hopefully, J.Y. is pronouncing "algae" wrong because I have always said "al-jee". Otherwise, I have been lied to my entire life.
unrelated but is anyone having a problem where they pause the video and it just goes blank until you unpause it again?? it's really annoying especially in cases like these where we want to understand elements of the answer before hearing his explanation.
I mapped this out with conditional logic and just told myself (this is weak) and was able to get the right answer. I wonder if that is enough to not get confused or it I am going to run into problems with this line of thinking.
@AlizaGGG I do the same thing with the understanding that the arrows I'm using represent a causal relationship between the two elements NOT a conditional relationship.
If it works for you, do it. It saves time by getting to the meat of the relationships. No one is grading your scratch paper and it won't mess you up!
the problem with these exercises is that all the answers but the right answer are easily struck out because of irrelevance or assumptions. In the drills and practice tests the challenge comes with the complexity of the mapping and answers.
I feel okay mapping things out but I know that I am not going to be able to map things quickly enough to meet the time requirements of the test. So I have no idea how to fix this issue besides just reading it and using whatever brain power I have to get the inferences correct.
Try to map it in your mind. Although it sounds very odd, with practice, you will be able to understand it.
Another tip:
Recently, I have been learning to take answers out with logic that we may get from mappings, such as condition sufficiency and necessity, I know this sounds like yapping. But with understanding how to map things out in your head with each premise that shows up, you'll encounter the answers in such a better position.
I took a minute to answer this question, 15 seconds of understanding my "map" and the rest reading the stimulus and the answers!
When I read the first sentence of the stimulus for the first time, because of the use of "by" I immediately thought that it might be a causal statement (was thinking that nutrient-rich sewage caused pollution of the estuaries). Now I can see that that's incorrect, but considering the time constraints, is there a simple way to make sure what you're reading is clearly a causal relationship or just a fact/statement? Do I just have to envision two things as phenomena in which the target phenomenon (effect) has definitely already happened as a result of the cause? Although I doubt this considering sometimes the language in the stimulus implies one phenomenon (cause) can only potentially cause the target one (effect). Any clarification would be great!
Took me awhile to realize this but if you click "quick view" above the video it will show the questions, and you can try it for yourself first before watching the explanation!
I use it as a blind review (and not looking at the answer, just color) because I have to patience for waiting to see what I got right or wrong (Im working on this lack of patience;)
What i've gathered so far is that we must be wary of the "only" "any way" words, as these would presume that nothing else outside of the question stem can be considered. Hope this helped!
Here's another tip. Choose the ONLY answer that does not bring in any sort of outside information. If an answer choice gives us information that wasn't given to us in the stimulus, why would you choose it? You really have to stick to just using the stimulus for everything you know.
I don't understand answer A. The fact kind already told us," The pollution from nutrient-rich sewage kills most of the fish. "Most means more than half, which can make answer A correct.
It's pretty basic — we don't have enough information to say that the claim made in answer A) must be true. We are not told anything about how other forms of pollution may affect the fish in the estuary. It is making a comparative claim that cannot be backed up, it is not simply saying saying that the fish are likely to die because of the aforementioned pollution.
One thing that helps me from getting distracted by answers intended to confuse/appeal to bias is I read the stimulus and then, without looking at the answer choices, figure out what must be true and look for a paraphrased version of that
Are there times when causal logic would have a conditional claim in it? Or if I see causal logic I know there isn't any conditional. The "when" used in the stimulus confuses me a little bit and I wonder how I can know it is not conditional and just causal.
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.
52 comments
i swear these videos just make it more complicated E just seemed right smh
So are answer choices that say "than" automatically never the correct answer?
Does anyone else pronounce it al-gee instead of al-ghee?
for some reason these are so much easier for me than the regular mbt
Just a general clarification question, what is the difference between causal relationship and conditional relationship when reading the stim and trying to understand it?
@DavesHotChkn A conditional logic is If A then B (A -> B). While casual is A causes B (A -> B) but you can also do B is caused by A (B-> A). Usually I would read it and say this is due to x1 and leads to x2... Since a phenomena happened caused another.
@amhuynh I think it is confusing because the "When" in sentence 2 signals a sufficient condition is about to be stated, "over nutrification of estuary waters" and thereby "algae proliferates" is the necessary condition. If you take the contrapositive, it looks very similar to (D).
@ak2 For me, when I read it, the "When" was not an indicator. For two reasons: (1) looking at the stim as a whole, you notice that they are chaining each subject in the sentence ( [a] est caused by (->) [b] overnutrified caused by (->) [c] algae proliferation (->) [d] abundant, rich food leads to toxicity to most fish. The conclusion is that most fish die because of est, a->d.
We can also infer b -> d.
(2) When I am looking for conditional logic, it should come in an if-then statement, but the second sentence said "as a result", which is a causal indicator.
couldn't you rule out A because it's talking about Sewage pollution when the passage only talks about nutrient rich sewage pollution?
@JacobA04 i don't think so because sewage might just be sewage. I immediately ruled that answer choice out because in compared to fish that were polluted in another way, which is not even mentioned in the stimulus. We are only talking about one fish population
Does anyone else dislike it when they only give a couple of answers at a time?
@SheridanMcGadden I don't know if this helps but I've been viewing the questions before hand and going through them on my own, and then watching the explanation. Unsure if that is what you were getting at, but it was a frustration for me for a time.
@JCSamson11 where are you seeing the whole question? I don't want to give the answer away before I have a chance to read it all.
@SheridanMcGadden Underneath the title "Lesson 7 - Coastal Estuaries" there is an eye next to "show question" that you can click on to view the question. This option is under all lesson titles.
@DanielleMeuret You're my hero. This has been bugging the shit out of me.
Am I getting better or are these all super easy
I've lived on a lake my whole life. Hopefully, J.Y. is pronouncing "algae" wrong because I have always said "al-jee". Otherwise, I have been lied to my entire life.
unrelated but is anyone having a problem where they pause the video and it just goes blank until you unpause it again?? it's really annoying especially in cases like these where we want to understand elements of the answer before hearing his explanation.
I mapped this out with conditional logic and just told myself (this is weak) and was able to get the right answer. I wonder if that is enough to not get confused or it I am going to run into problems with this line of thinking.
@AlizaGGG I do the same thing with the understanding that the arrows I'm using represent a causal relationship between the two elements NOT a conditional relationship.
If it works for you, do it. It saves time by getting to the meat of the relationships. No one is grading your scratch paper and it won't mess you up!
the problem with these exercises is that all the answers but the right answer are easily struck out because of irrelevance or assumptions. In the drills and practice tests the challenge comes with the complexity of the mapping and answers.
I think this is where I am struggling too, these practice problems I rarely get confused or get incorrect. Can't say the same on the drills though
How can we tell that this question contains a causal relationship and not a conditional relationship? #help
Does anyone ever feel like we're kinda doing math when we're mapping and diagramming?
Yess
I feel okay mapping things out but I know that I am not going to be able to map things quickly enough to meet the time requirements of the test. So I have no idea how to fix this issue besides just reading it and using whatever brain power I have to get the inferences correct.
Try to map it in your mind. Although it sounds very odd, with practice, you will be able to understand it.
Another tip:
Recently, I have been learning to take answers out with logic that we may get from mappings, such as condition sufficiency and necessity, I know this sounds like yapping. But with understanding how to map things out in your head with each premise that shows up, you'll encounter the answers in such a better position.
I took a minute to answer this question, 15 seconds of understanding my "map" and the rest reading the stimulus and the answers!
When I read the first sentence of the stimulus for the first time, because of the use of "by" I immediately thought that it might be a causal statement (was thinking that nutrient-rich sewage caused pollution of the estuaries). Now I can see that that's incorrect, but considering the time constraints, is there a simple way to make sure what you're reading is clearly a causal relationship or just a fact/statement? Do I just have to envision two things as phenomena in which the target phenomenon (effect) has definitely already happened as a result of the cause? Although I doubt this considering sometimes the language in the stimulus implies one phenomenon (cause) can only potentially cause the target one (effect). Any clarification would be great!
#help
Took me awhile to realize this but if you click "quick view" above the video it will show the questions, and you can try it for yourself first before watching the explanation!
I use it as a blind review (and not looking at the answer, just color) because I have to patience for waiting to see what I got right or wrong (Im working on this lack of patience;)
Thank you!! Very helpful.
What i've gathered so far is that we must be wary of the "only" "any way" words, as these would presume that nothing else outside of the question stem can be considered. Hope this helped!
Here's another tip. Choose the ONLY answer that does not bring in any sort of outside information. If an answer choice gives us information that wasn't given to us in the stimulus, why would you choose it? You really have to stick to just using the stimulus for everything you know.
if you are going to ask people to pause to consider the answer choices it would be best to make them visible while pausing, this is quite annoying
i wish the penmanship was a bit more clear
I don't understand answer A. The fact kind already told us," The pollution from nutrient-rich sewage kills most of the fish. "Most means more than half, which can make answer A correct.
It's pretty basic — we don't have enough information to say that the claim made in answer A) must be true. We are not told anything about how other forms of pollution may affect the fish in the estuary. It is making a comparative claim that cannot be backed up, it is not simply saying saying that the fish are likely to die because of the aforementioned pollution.
algi
One thing that helps me from getting distracted by answers intended to confuse/appeal to bias is I read the stimulus and then, without looking at the answer choices, figure out what must be true and look for a paraphrased version of that
Are there times when causal logic would have a conditional claim in it? Or if I see causal logic I know there isn't any conditional. The "when" used in the stimulus confuses me a little bit and I wonder how I can know it is not conditional and just causal.