If the answer choice E was worded "... in the fossilization of sharks' teeth are more common" instead of as common, then would E help resolve the paradox more than answer choice A?
I'm not really following the whole naive assumption thing. For me, it makes more sense to find an answer choice that is the best hypothesis for the facts. Can someone better explain how assumptions come into play?
Hmm, I feel like I am thinking on these wrong. I got it right, but I think it is mostly just because I knew the answer. What concerns me is that I find C a bit convincing, because my brain says "If we trust the answers to be true, then that means the Stimulus can be incorrect then?" So I keep trying to critique the stim and break down what it is missing. So I feel like on harder questions, this is gonna bite me. Hopefully these lessons will help me to better understand what to do instead of trying to pick at a flaw in the stimulus cause I just think that right now, my mindset is struggling to identify these correctly.
Science has always been my weakest subject in school, the analytics have told me I do the worst on these type of questions, I may just skip these lol I cant understand the stimulus, the choices, or the explanations.
These explanations are cool but after all these weeks I am starting to realize that the presenter goes on far too many tangents. I got the correct answer, and I am able to explain why the other answers are wrong, but this guy just starts to confuse my reasoning with all of his 100 other reasonings on why the answer is right or wrong. Stop it
When you're on hunt mode for the answer, how much do you still read the other answers? Hunt mode is supposed to save time, but I still check everything else to be safe and am worried this takes just as much time as POE
I locked in A without reading the other answer options because it lined up with what I expected to see in the correct answer. Is this ever reasonable to do on the actual test, or is it always better to read all answers?
I think another reason that A is correct over the answer that states that sharks today lose many sets of teeth in their lifetime is that it resolves another phenomenon that I'm surprised wasn't mentioned in the video--that shark skeletons are made up of cartilage compared to the bones of the vertebrate skeleton, which they state are more durable by stating that they're made out of bone which they've established to be durable.
What's helping me with these questions is asking "Why?"
Why are there more shark teeth found than skeletons? I apply that question to each of the answers and whichever one satisfies both parts of the question is the right one.
While I always appreciate the detailed breakdowns of why wrong answers are wrong, and the delving into conditional and causal reasoning, grammar parsing, and unpacking the other intricacies of the syntax, I wonder if it can be unhelpful sometimes. I feel that, before even unpacking the answers many can be eliminated just with a surface level analysis spurred on by the question: "Does the stimulus even mention this?"
LSAT writers take advantage of our instinct to supplement the little (often confusing) information contained within the question stimulus, with our own background knowledge and assumptions (though this CAN be helpful.. for example if you already knew that sharks have a skeleton composed of cartilage and not bone.) Though, more often than not it's actually terribly unhelpful.
What I find most helpful when reading the question stimulus if to FORGET all other background information, and remind myself that really the only information needed to correctly answer the question is contained within it, and then move forward from there.
Will we have enough time to go back and do blind review during the actual test? I’ve noticed I can almost always get the answer right the second time around.
Lol really appriciated that quick Episode Three reference. Made my day.
1
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!
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.
94 comments
If the answer choice E was worded "... in the fossilization of sharks' teeth are more common" instead of as common, then would E help resolve the paradox more than answer choice A?
I picked B so confidently LOL. Still don't fully understand how A is correct, but I'll keep practicing loll
wait I don't understand this at all LOL
Can someone explain the concept of a naive assumption
But I feel that A is taking outside information for the answer. How do we know that? It does not really explain it
i love sharks
I got this one right, but once again I am like almost 5 minutes over the expected time.,
I'm not really following the whole naive assumption thing. For me, it makes more sense to find an answer choice that is the best hypothesis for the facts. Can someone better explain how assumptions come into play?
Hmm, I feel like I am thinking on these wrong. I got it right, but I think it is mostly just because I knew the answer. What concerns me is that I find C a bit convincing, because my brain says "If we trust the answers to be true, then that means the Stimulus can be incorrect then?" So I keep trying to critique the stim and break down what it is missing. So I feel like on harder questions, this is gonna bite me. Hopefully these lessons will help me to better understand what to do instead of trying to pick at a flaw in the stimulus cause I just think that right now, my mindset is struggling to identify these correctly.
Science has always been my weakest subject in school, the analytics have told me I do the worst on these type of questions, I may just skip these lol I cant understand the stimulus, the choices, or the explanations.
I got the answer correct but for some reason I always go to the other answers and try to find reason for them being wrong and increase my time
These explanations are cool but after all these weeks I am starting to realize that the presenter goes on far too many tangents. I got the correct answer, and I am able to explain why the other answers are wrong, but this guy just starts to confuse my reasoning with all of his 100 other reasonings on why the answer is right or wrong. Stop it
the people demand more shark questions kevin...
i fucking love sharks
Sharks are my special interest.
these are sooo much more intuitive to me than that formal logic mess
i genuinely don't get these. like these make negative sense.
When you're on hunt mode for the answer, how much do you still read the other answers? Hunt mode is supposed to save time, but I still check everything else to be safe and am worried this takes just as much time as POE
I locked in A without reading the other answer options because it lined up with what I expected to see in the correct answer. Is this ever reasonable to do on the actual test, or is it always better to read all answers?
Did anyone else choose E? I was able to narrow it down to A and E, but ultimately chose E. I see why it is wrong now and why A would be right.
I think another reason that A is correct over the answer that states that sharks today lose many sets of teeth in their lifetime is that it resolves another phenomenon that I'm surprised wasn't mentioned in the video--that shark skeletons are made up of cartilage compared to the bones of the vertebrate skeleton, which they state are more durable by stating that they're made out of bone which they've established to be durable.
What's helping me with these questions is asking "Why?"
Why are there more shark teeth found than skeletons? I apply that question to each of the answers and whichever one satisfies both parts of the question is the right one.
While I always appreciate the detailed breakdowns of why wrong answers are wrong, and the delving into conditional and causal reasoning, grammar parsing, and unpacking the other intricacies of the syntax, I wonder if it can be unhelpful sometimes. I feel that, before even unpacking the answers many can be eliminated just with a surface level analysis spurred on by the question: "Does the stimulus even mention this?"
LSAT writers take advantage of our instinct to supplement the little (often confusing) information contained within the question stimulus, with our own background knowledge and assumptions (though this CAN be helpful.. for example if you already knew that sharks have a skeleton composed of cartilage and not bone.) Though, more often than not it's actually terribly unhelpful.
What I find most helpful when reading the question stimulus if to FORGET all other background information, and remind myself that really the only information needed to correctly answer the question is contained within it, and then move forward from there.
Will we have enough time to go back and do blind review during the actual test? I’ve noticed I can almost always get the answer right the second time around.
Lol really appriciated that quick Episode Three reference. Made my day.