What has helped me for RRE has been identifying opposing views and inserting a "yet" in between each other, to help generate possible explanations. Not sure if that makes sense! But it works!
Hmm not a fan of this one. I thought D sounded correct, but I was skeptical that I was attaching too much of my own personal bias as a nature lover so I chose E. Now it turns out my personal bias was right? 😵💫
So much information is repeated throughout these lessons. I would appreciate if the presenter took the time to condense his ideas. This easily could be a 12 minute video.
I failed this because when I was coming up for potential explanations for why the experts didn't recommend electric bug zappers, I thought that if they weren't bright enough the insects wouldn't be attracted to them in the daytime.
Once I saw "provide less light," I didn't really think it through again. Confirm your assumptions people.
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.
@Sameer_Ahamad This is my general strategy for most LR questions. I sniff out the conclusion/support first and then I try and analyze the passage. Helps put things into context much faster!
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.
@Lylas123 Given my understanding, yes that's correct. (B) compares their effectiveness against mosquitoes vs other harmful insects and (C) compares their use of electricity and light production vs other light sources, but neither address why birds or insecticide sprays should be used instead of bug zappers :)
Yes (and a few other reasons). The correct answer in this case was a comparative statement. The fact that something is a comparative statement means very little in and of itself. It is just like something being a causal statement, or a predictive statement. We just have to make sure that the specific passage has the unique firepower necessary to support that statement.
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.
The answer's truth wasn't questioned - we know for sure that those developers make the claim, because we are working under the assumption that the answer is true.
What we don't know is if the developers were being honest. Does their insecticide really have no chemicals that are harmful to humans, birds, or pets?
Also - even if we took the actual facts of the developers claim to be true (even though that is not the truth of the matter asserted in the statement), it still doesn't explain the phenomena. The phenomena has a gap between the zappers and the insecticide spray. Answer choice E doesn't give a reason why zappers are inferior/insecticide is superior, but rather just listing a feature of the insecticide. Just because it could be safe for birds doesn't mean zappers aren't also safe for birds. From my understanding the best answer choice from this set of facts would have been a good comparison claim between the two products.
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.
@pietroa.parillo me too, but wouldn't this specific example be "improper opinion"? Because we aren't experts, so our assumptions are not based on fact, which could be misleading
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.
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.
60 comments
What has helped me for RRE has been identifying opposing views and inserting a "yet" in between each other, to help generate possible explanations. Not sure if that makes sense! But it works!
ex. How is that ....... yet .......
Hmm not a fan of this one. I thought D sounded correct, but I was skeptical that I was attaching too much of my own personal bias as a nature lover so I chose E. Now it turns out my personal bias was right? 😵💫
I. Do. Not. Get. This. At. All.
POE worked for me. And that's how I got my answer.
@Shannell_E'llan yep. Got the answer in like 40 seconds using POE.
So much information is repeated throughout these lessons. I would appreciate if the presenter took the time to condense his ideas. This easily could be a 12 minute video.
@ZachistheLawyerinCharge watch on 2.5x :)
I failed this because when I was coming up for potential explanations for why the experts didn't recommend electric bug zappers, I thought that if they weren't bright enough the insects wouldn't be attracted to them in the daytime.
Once I saw "provide less light," I didn't really think it through again. Confirm your assumptions people.
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.
@Sameer_Ahamad This is my general strategy for most LR questions. I sniff out the conclusion/support first and then I try and analyze the passage. Helps put things into context much faster!
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?
@Lylas123 Given my understanding, yes that's correct. (B) compares their effectiveness against mosquitoes vs other harmful insects and (C) compares their use of electricity and light production vs other light sources, but neither address why birds or insecticide sprays should be used instead of bug zappers :)
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.
@IsabellaP I was just thinking this
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?
Yes (and a few other reasons). The correct answer in this case was a comparative statement. The fact that something is a comparative statement means very little in and of itself. It is just like something being a causal statement, or a predictive statement. We just have to make sure that the specific passage has the unique firepower necessary to support that statement.
I am just glad that there are no "None of the above" answer choices on the LSAT
real
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?
@smorua1202932 Dude oh my god. The "why?" trick helped me immediately when I felt underwater. THIS IS WHY I READ THE COMMENTS thank u kind soul <3
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.
The answer's truth wasn't questioned - we know for sure that those developers make the claim, because we are working under the assumption that the answer is true.
What we don't know is if the developers were being honest. Does their insecticide really have no chemicals that are harmful to humans, birds, or pets?
Also - even if we took the actual facts of the developers claim to be true (even though that is not the truth of the matter asserted in the statement), it still doesn't explain the phenomena. The phenomena has a gap between the zappers and the insecticide spray. Answer choice E doesn't give a reason why zappers are inferior/insecticide is superior, but rather just listing a feature of the insecticide. Just because it could be safe for birds doesn't mean zappers aren't also safe for birds. From my understanding the best answer choice from this set of facts would have been a good comparison claim between the two products.
So can we ignore any answers that follow the "I say X" structure for RRE?
idk
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.
@pietroa.parillo me too, but wouldn't this specific example be "improper opinion"? Because we aren't experts, so our assumptions are not based on fact, which could be misleading
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 would agree with this.
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?
@tjh361508 There's a gap between the facts in the stimulus, and the correct answer best bridges that gap based on the strength of its support