I really don't like how you pretend to select a wrong answer as correct initially. It really messes with my thinking. I understand what you're doing but it causes confusion for me.
I almost predicted D. I figured the bug zappers might kill too many insects and/or be harmful to the ecosystem in some way. B almost got me, but it didn't mention why the birds or sprays are preferable. They could be even worse at killing mosquitoes than the zappers. We don't know.
the reason for answer choice E not being correct makes no sense. The answer was questioned if true or not - that could have been done to all of the answer questions.
This is my first time with an RRE question. I got the correct answer (D) after having to think for several minutes.
First, I realized that this a comparison between zappers and birds/sprays.
Secondly, I realized the author was not trying to convince me that birds/sprayers are better, but that, zappers were bad for X reason, and that we should use a different alternative regardless of how much better or worse it would be in comparison to zappers.
I find that it is best to write out the comparisons or arguments. For these notes I asked “why no zappers” “why birds and sprays”. Only question D addressed both questions while the rest only addressed one of the questions. Could be a good technique moving forward.
I selected answer choice D for two reasons: 1) there was no comparison of birds and the sprays & 2) the zapper is environmentally worse. BUT, if we're going to be honest, especially in today's society, I'd be willing to bet more people (including the pest controllers) would go with B bc they would be more concerned with ridding their homes of mosquitoes than protecting the environment.
I wanted to double-check my reasoning. Is the answer choice B incorrect because it partially explains only a subset of the facts ? Yes, they do talk about bug zappers being less effective, but there is no mention of insect-eating birds or insect sprays and how they are more effective.
considering it says "If true" B is still a good answer. assuming it is true it provides a reason for the recommendation. D could be incrementally better or worse, either could be argued. nonsense like this is why the lsat should just be removed, there's gotta be a better way to admit people.
A little confused--- can answer choices in RRE questions ever be false/untrue? The stem says that all answers are to be taken as true. So for B, the video even argues that one reason to reject this answer is that it contradicts the stem by claiming that there are some harmful insects that the zapper is not as effective at killing (i.e. mosquitoes). Rather than say that B is "wrong"/contradicts the stimulus (since RRE answer choices are to be taken as true), wouldn't it be more correct to say that B is simply making a wrong comparison/committing a category error? The phenomenon demands an explanation of effectiveness of zappers vs. effectiveness of other means, but B talks about effectiveness of zappers against mosquitoes vs. effectiveness of zappers against other insects.
I'm kinda hung up on this because I am still not sure whether to treat answer choices as completely true or not. Because if they AREN"T all guaranteed to be true, then it's more of a headache and more cognitive burden for me to then evaluate, for each answer choice, "ok, is this actually making a true claim."
Your explanation on E probably just gained me a point on the LSAT! I have never realized that the truth is that something is being claimed not that the claim is true.
Very helpful!
36
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!
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.
51 comments
I feel like they delve too deep to the point it makes me overthink. This was a pretty straight forward question that doesn't need this many steps
I really don't like how you pretend to select a wrong answer as correct initially. It really messes with my thinking. I understand what you're doing but it causes confusion for me.
This was a great explanation. Thank you!
Is finding the conclusion of the stimulus and then looking for an answer that supports the conclusion a good way to solve RRE questions?
Most pest control experts now advise against their use (Electric bug zappers) and use Birds or insecticides.
Basically, look for Bug Zapper bad and Birds and insectisides are good.
A. If true, does that show why not to use Zapper? No.
B. This shows bug zappers are bad, but does it show why birds and insecticides are good? No
C. This shows zappers are bad, but does it show why Birds and insecticides are good? No.
D. Shows bug zappers are bad and birds and insecticides are good.
E. Claims insecticides are good, but it is someone's claim.
I am so happy I leaned towards (D).
I almost predicted D. I figured the bug zappers might kill too many insects and/or be harmful to the ecosystem in some way. B almost got me, but it didn't mention why the birds or sprays are preferable. They could be even worse at killing mosquitoes than the zappers. We don't know.
Hi, just to clarify, are you able to rule out B and C since they compare a quality of bug zappers that is not mentioned at all in the stimulus?
Hi! How can you tell the question difficultly on the new 7sage site? In the old one it showed you the answer data, but here I can't find it.
So is it the fact they are comparing the wrong things and not the fact that they are comparative statements that make B and C wrong?
I am just glad that there are no "None of the above" answer choices on the LSAT
One thing that works for me for RREs is asking a question:
Exp. Why do we want to replace effective Electric Zappers with birds?
Why is detective Conan considered good with a 10% solving rate?
You got be there with B. I felt the walls caving in
the reason for answer choice E not being correct makes no sense. The answer was questioned if true or not - that could have been done to all of the answer questions.
So can we ignore any answers that follow the "I say X" structure for RRE?
This is my first time with an RRE question. I got the correct answer (D) after having to think for several minutes.
First, I realized that this a comparison between zappers and birds/sprays.
Secondly, I realized the author was not trying to convince me that birds/sprayers are better, but that, zappers were bad for X reason, and that we should use a different alternative regardless of how much better or worse it would be in comparison to zappers.
This lesson made me realize why the hearsay objection is relevant.
I find that it is best to write out the comparisons or arguments. For these notes I asked “why no zappers” “why birds and sprays”. Only question D addressed both questions while the rest only addressed one of the questions. Could be a good technique moving forward.
I selected answer choice D for two reasons: 1) there was no comparison of birds and the sprays & 2) the zapper is environmentally worse. BUT, if we're going to be honest, especially in today's society, I'd be willing to bet more people (including the pest controllers) would go with B bc they would be more concerned with ridding their homes of mosquitoes than protecting the environment.
So for RRE despite these statements being true, we have to assume to get the answer?
I wanted to double-check my reasoning. Is the answer choice B incorrect because it partially explains only a subset of the facts ? Yes, they do talk about bug zappers being less effective, but there is no mention of insect-eating birds or insect sprays and how they are more effective.
considering it says "If true" B is still a good answer. assuming it is true it provides a reason for the recommendation. D could be incrementally better or worse, either could be argued. nonsense like this is why the lsat should just be removed, there's gotta be a better way to admit people.
#feedback Please edit videos to have the answers visible. So we as viewers can take a shot before the 13 minute explanation.
A little confused--- can answer choices in RRE questions ever be false/untrue? The stem says that all answers are to be taken as true. So for B, the video even argues that one reason to reject this answer is that it contradicts the stem by claiming that there are some harmful insects that the zapper is not as effective at killing (i.e. mosquitoes). Rather than say that B is "wrong"/contradicts the stimulus (since RRE answer choices are to be taken as true), wouldn't it be more correct to say that B is simply making a wrong comparison/committing a category error? The phenomenon demands an explanation of effectiveness of zappers vs. effectiveness of other means, but B talks about effectiveness of zappers against mosquitoes vs. effectiveness of zappers against other insects.
I'm kinda hung up on this because I am still not sure whether to treat answer choices as completely true or not. Because if they AREN"T all guaranteed to be true, then it's more of a headache and more cognitive burden for me to then evaluate, for each answer choice, "ok, is this actually making a true claim."
So are answers that make a comparative claim always assumed to be wrong in RRE questions?
Your explanation on E probably just gained me a point on the LSAT! I have never realized that the truth is that something is being claimed not that the claim is true.
Very helpful!