I was dumb and answered D but got E on the blind review. Honestly I have a hard time with MBF questions, my brain equates the right answer with whats true.
I knew the answer was E, but still i was so confused about how to approach this question when going to the answers. but i think i figured it out and maybe it'll help u too.
I basically just went through the answers giving them "true" or "false" labels.
bc this is a MBF question, 4 should be true and 1 must be false.
So, based on the info we learned in the stimulus, labelling true or false on each answer with POE can make it sooo much simpler (at least for me). yay
I was SO CLOSE To picking C then I was like WAIT what does provide the basis of rejecting mean. Sorry had to cheat and googled that it means its a "must be false question". That's the only reason I got that question right. Now I know for the future HOW important it is to read the question stem!
I feel that may statement can vouch for most people that picked answer choice C is due to how the questions was written. The word choice made it confusing for me to choose E over C until there was video explanation of what the question was specifically asking.
Can someone explain to me why it is unreasonable to assume that banning smoking in workplaces offers some protection to people outside of their workplaces? Those people presumably have some protection from secondhand smoke when they visit other people's workplaces, such as grocery stores or restaurants.
I see why E is correct, but I fail to understand why C isn't also correct. Are we living in a hypothetical world where no one is ever a customer or visitor in someone else's workplace?
@JessHyder The difference between C and E is that C merely provides support for the stimulus instead of being rejected by the stimulus like E is (anti-supported).
C is claiming that the law offers no protection from 2nd hand smoke outside the workplace, the passage is simply confirming this idea. Therefore, C wouldn't be rejected by the stimulus because it doesn't fall on the anti-support side of the spectrum, as E does.
@JessHyder We don't know for a fact that there are no other laws in place that may protect people from second hand smoke. We know it IS prohibited in the workplace and is NOT prohibited at home. This opens up doors for there to be laws such as "no smoking allowed in public restrooms" which is not a workplace and is not a home but can be governed.
I find it best to imagine a world where anything and everything can happen!
So I have been struggling with inference questions and I decided to take a day break of studying and I watched a video that kinda helped get my mind straight and think more logically.
Okay so if someone is walking inside and they are soaked head to toe, the first thing you should think of is that "they are not dry" and make no assumptions about them at all. the only facts you have is that they are wet and not dry.
I have no idea if that is going to help anyone but for some reason after struggling with inference questions for 2 weeks, this made it click. I just know I am always looking through these comments trying to find another perspective to make it click. :)
@YazanMoubayed Honestly that was a while ago when I saw it on TikTok. However, everything that I wrote in the comment is exactly what the video said.
Another way to look at the example I stated is that when someone who walks inside who is soaked head to toe. You should not be thinking of reasons to why they are wet, like it's raining, they fell into the pool... you should only think about how they are wet.
So to move into an LSAT version. I think the key is to NOT ASSUME ANYTHING. The only thing you should do is gather information from what you see in the stimulus.
@Eymendkk That's what I thought at first but the answer choice says (to paraphrase)
"the law will protect the house cleaners from secondhand smoke in their workplace"
That can be rejected because the house cleaner is working in someone else's home, and that person (the person who owns the home) is allowed to smoke in their home, thus the law does NOT protect the housecleaners from secondhand smoke.
I didn't really understand the question stem, I was able to eliminate A,B,D but I chose C and still don't see how it's wrong. I guess I can see it a little because the context supports C, there is no support for people outside of the workplace to catch SS.
The question stem is asking us, of the answer choices available, which one would the stimulus be able to reject. The answer choices are claims - we have to find the claim that would not be supported/ would be rejected by the stimulus. Let me explain:
Stimulus recap (more or less): the new workplace law prohibits smoking, but the law is unfortunately ambiguous and does not explicitly include smoking in homes.
Rule: no smoking allowed in workplaces
Exception: still legal to smoke at home.
INFERENCE: anyone working in a home would have to deal with second-hand smoke if there are smokers in the home.
Answer choice E is correct because A maid is claiming that she WILL be protected under this law... But wait - didn't we just read that home smoking is still allowed? And a housemaid works in a home?
The maid's claim falls under the exception of this legal rule. So, we can conclude that the law would actually reject this claim! The stimulus is saying "no you've got it wrong, you won't be protected!" ie. a rejection of this answer choice. This is what we are looking for. A rejection.
To clarify why E is correct and C is not:
-> Answer choice C is not being rejected by the stimulus. The stimulus is saying, yeah you're right, there's no protection! In other words, the stimulus is not rejecting the claim made by answer choice C. It's agreeing with it.
-> Answer choice E is instead being rejected by the stimulus. A housemaid is under the impression they will be protected by this law, yet the legal commentator states that the law won't apply to home smokers. So if you work in a home, you will not be protected under this workplace act!
So if (E) is the answer, is this saying that when a domestic worker is cleaning inside someone's house, the owner of the house is not allowed to smoke on property during the cleaning process?
No, the law doesn't apply to domestic workers because it's someone else home even though it's their workplace. The legislators cannot enforce the law on someone's home. Does my explanation help?
Yes, that is why it is the correct answer. It directly goes against the stimulus that tells us the law does NOT ban smoking in people's own homes, regardless of whether others work there or not.
So for A and B you said "will be " should indicate that it is wrong because it is trying to make a prediction that we just cannot know for sure based on the argument, but E also had "will protect" what makes it different in this case. I understand why E is right for the most part but that part still confuses me bc I do not want it to cause me more trouble/confusion later on
If the law in the question them is true, then domestic workers will not be protected from secondhand smoke in their workplace.
We know this because the question stem states that the law can never be interpreted as prventing people from smoking in their homes, which double as wrokplaces for domestic workers.
However, A and B are not answered/addressed if you take the stem to be true. The question stem does not address how it will be interpreted or supported.
By doing the thought experiment of imagining the world as the question stem says, you can see that E is totally addressed by the law.
I should have read the question better, I chose C prior to blind review as I thought it was what the stem was SUPPORTING, not REJECTING! Glad I caught it on blind review.
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.
80 comments
I was dumb and answered D but got E on the blind review. Honestly I have a hard time with MBF questions, my brain equates the right answer with whats true.
I knew the answer was E, but still i was so confused about how to approach this question when going to the answers. but i think i figured it out and maybe it'll help u too.
I basically just went through the answers giving them "true" or "false" labels.
bc this is a MBF question, 4 should be true and 1 must be false.
So, based on the info we learned in the stimulus, labelling true or false on each answer with POE can make it sooo much simpler (at least for me). yay
I was SO CLOSE To picking C then I was like WAIT what does provide the basis of rejecting mean. Sorry had to cheat and googled that it means its a "must be false question". That's the only reason I got that question right. Now I know for the future HOW important it is to read the question stem!
I feel that may statement can vouch for most people that picked answer choice C is due to how the questions was written. The word choice made it confusing for me to choose E over C until there was video explanation of what the question was specifically asking.
Ok, got it right but I was 48 seconds over.
Having this 'supposed' to be done in 1min is absolutely diabolical. 1:24 here. But correct is correct.
LETS GO ANOTHER DUB
I see many people now confused why it isn't C
Carefully read the question stem - which provides a basis for REJECTING (not supporting) the claim?
Can someone explain to me why it is unreasonable to assume that banning smoking in workplaces offers some protection to people outside of their workplaces? Those people presumably have some protection from secondhand smoke when they visit other people's workplaces, such as grocery stores or restaurants.
I see why E is correct, but I fail to understand why C isn't also correct. Are we living in a hypothetical world where no one is ever a customer or visitor in someone else's workplace?
@JessHyder The difference between C and E is that C merely provides support for the stimulus instead of being rejected by the stimulus like E is (anti-supported).
C is claiming that the law offers no protection from 2nd hand smoke outside the workplace, the passage is simply confirming this idea. Therefore, C wouldn't be rejected by the stimulus because it doesn't fall on the anti-support side of the spectrum, as E does.
@JessHyder We don't know for a fact that there are no other laws in place that may protect people from second hand smoke. We know it IS prohibited in the workplace and is NOT prohibited at home. This opens up doors for there to be laws such as "no smoking allowed in public restrooms" which is not a workplace and is not a home but can be governed.
I find it best to imagine a world where anything and everything can happen!
[This comment was deleted.]
@JackFoley I don't think you being confused is a necessary condition for JY being unable to explain stuff to clients lol
@MacSelesnick needing some ice is the necessary condition for getting burned
So I have been struggling with inference questions and I decided to take a day break of studying and I watched a video that kinda helped get my mind straight and think more logically.
Okay so if someone is walking inside and they are soaked head to toe, the first thing you should think of is that "they are not dry" and make no assumptions about them at all. the only facts you have is that they are wet and not dry.
I have no idea if that is going to help anyone but for some reason after struggling with inference questions for 2 weeks, this made it click. I just know I am always looking through these comments trying to find another perspective to make it click. :)
@CourtneyPierce can you send the video
@YazanMoubayed Honestly that was a while ago when I saw it on TikTok. However, everything that I wrote in the comment is exactly what the video said.
Another way to look at the example I stated is that when someone who walks inside who is soaked head to toe. You should not be thinking of reasons to why they are wet, like it's raining, they fell into the pool... you should only think about how they are wet.
So to move into an LSAT version. I think the key is to NOT ASSUME ANYTHING. The only thing you should do is gather information from what you see in the stimulus.
"provides a basis for rejecting which one of the following claims?" = which of the answer choices would the stimulus prove incorrect
@jansenbienmbelarmino Thank you
If we define workplace as a place where people work, then homes would count as workplaces for housecleaners. I think this is a bad question
@Eymendkk That's what I thought at first but the answer choice says (to paraphrase)
That can be rejected because the house cleaner is working in someone else's home, and that person (the person who owns the home) is allowed to smoke in their home, thus the law does NOT protect the housecleaners from secondhand smoke.
@Eymendkk I work from home, so my home is my workplace, but because it is my home, I am allowed to smoke in my workplace.
I had a partial stroke reading the question for some reason LOL. Got it right but had to reread it a few times
@AnibalCPerez me too
I found this right and it was honestly so easy. Like basic logic. I don't get how I find hard questions right but not the 'medium' or easy ones...lol
I didn't really understand the question stem, I was able to eliminate A,B,D but I chose C and still don't see how it's wrong. I guess I can see it a little because the context supports C, there is no support for people outside of the workplace to catch SS.
The question stem is asking us, of the answer choices available, which one would the stimulus be able to reject. The answer choices are claims - we have to find the claim that would not be supported/ would be rejected by the stimulus. Let me explain:
Stimulus recap (more or less): the new workplace law prohibits smoking, but the law is unfortunately ambiguous and does not explicitly include smoking in homes.
Rule: no smoking allowed in workplaces
Exception: still legal to smoke at home.
INFERENCE: anyone working in a home would have to deal with second-hand smoke if there are smokers in the home.
Answer choice E is correct because A maid is claiming that she WILL be protected under this law... But wait - didn't we just read that home smoking is still allowed? And a housemaid works in a home?
The maid's claim falls under the exception of this legal rule. So, we can conclude that the law would actually reject this claim! The stimulus is saying "no you've got it wrong, you won't be protected!" ie. a rejection of this answer choice. This is what we are looking for. A rejection.
To clarify why E is correct and C is not:
-> Answer choice C is not being rejected by the stimulus. The stimulus is saying, yeah you're right, there's no protection! In other words, the stimulus is not rejecting the claim made by answer choice C. It's agreeing with it.
-> Answer choice E is instead being rejected by the stimulus. A housemaid is under the impression they will be protected by this law, yet the legal commentator states that the law won't apply to home smokers. So if you work in a home, you will not be protected under this workplace act!
I hope this helps simplify it :)
@9oliviapiccolo thank you so much. This helped!
I would of got this one right if I didn't skip over the word "rejecting"
"that's why you have executive AND legislative branches" --could somebody please remind the current US admin of that LOL
So if (E) is the answer, is this saying that when a domestic worker is cleaning inside someone's house, the owner of the house is not allowed to smoke on property during the cleaning process?
No, the law doesn't apply to domestic workers because it's someone else home even though it's their workplace. The legislators cannot enforce the law on someone's home. Does my explanation help?
Yes, that is why it is the correct answer. It directly goes against the stimulus that tells us the law does NOT ban smoking in people's own homes, regardless of whether others work there or not.
So for A and B you said "will be " should indicate that it is wrong because it is trying to make a prediction that we just cannot know for sure based on the argument, but E also had "will protect" what makes it different in this case. I understand why E is right for the most part but that part still confuses me bc I do not want it to cause me more trouble/confusion later on
A key part of this is in the stimulus- "if true"
If the law in the question them is true, then domestic workers will not be protected from secondhand smoke in their workplace.
We know this because the question stem states that the law can never be interpreted as prventing people from smoking in their homes, which double as wrokplaces for domestic workers.
However, A and B are not answered/addressed if you take the stem to be true. The question stem does not address how it will be interpreted or supported.
By doing the thought experiment of imagining the world as the question stem says, you can see that E is totally addressed by the law.
I should have read the question better, I chose C prior to blind review as I thought it was what the stem was SUPPORTING, not REJECTING! Glad I caught it on blind review.
I got this correct, but the question stem was a doozy
I think if I understood the question stem, I would have chosen E.
Got it right the first time but then talked myself out of it on br smh
these are easier than must be true ones