Just curious, is it okay to read the written explanation for some of these lessons as opposed to watching the video? Reading is faster, and I find I'm sometimes more attentive when actively reading than when I'm watching the videos.
@LSATKilla87 I always read and rarely watch the videos. For one, I'd rather exercise my reading muscles as much as I can since the LSAT is so reading intensive, and I can take better notes this way.
"I was curious, so I looked this up. On average, a shark produces 35,000 teeth over its lifetime. Each tooth is about a gram in weight. Over a lifetime, that's 35kg of teeth. Most sharks weigh between 680 and 1,800kg, with cartilage representing 6-8% of their total weight. That's 40-108kg. Even on the low end, skeletons still outweigh teeth."
What is this talking about. 25 fossilized shark teeth that weigh 1gram each outweighs the count of fossils compared to 1 shark skeleton that weighs 100kg.
Its talking about outweighing in terms of cardinality, not literal weight.
im annoyed at A being the answer because, sure it explains how fossilized shark skeletons are diff from other fossilized vertebraes (they're cartilage), but how can we just assume that the shark teeth are not cartilage? it doesn't really make clear the diff between shark teeth and shark skeleton for me, it only clears up fossilized shark skeleton vs others. am i allowed to just assume shark teeth are not cartilage based on the way A is written? i don't think that any of the other answer choices are any better than A, but I'm nervous to repeat the same issue I have with A on other questions.
@meepmorp yes. the statement says that teeth and bone are much more likely to fossilize than cartilage, so it is a very reasonable assumption to make that teeth are closer to bone than to cartilage in terms of its likelihood in fossilizing.
@meepmorp I think with these question types, it won't serve you best if you try to pick holes in the ACs. All ACs are equally "true" but we have to pick the one that is more acceptable to explain the phenomenon.
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?
@LSAT1011 I believe it's something we just assume using real world knowledge that an expert in the field or topic would otherwise not make. It's a common trap for the questions.
@LSAT1011 It is when you see two or more facts in a stimulus and assume something that isn’t stated. For example: “Conan is the best detective, yet his clearance rate is below average.” These two statements may seem confusing at first. How can Conan be the best detective if his clearance rate is low? This confusion comes from operating under a naive assumption—that if Conan is the best detective, his clearance rate must also be the highest. That assumption is what creates the apparent contradiction in your mind. The correct answer resolves this by breaking that assumption: “Conan gets the hardest cases.” Now it makes sense why Conan could have a below-average clearance rate. Hope that helps.
@Mullinsc22 That's what makes this type of question different from the ones discussed earlier in the module! In RRE questions (among other types), we have to take the answer choices as true. This question stem even plainly states 'if true', as in if the following answer choices are true. Don't think about why A is true, but how it fits into the stimulus.
@Mullinsc22 You can use outside information for RRE questions! They are different from the previous modules. Just make sure the answer choice explains the casual relationships in the stimulus.
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.
@LegallyMinded you can trust the answer choices to be true, while the stimulus is also true. In RRE questions, the stimulus is true. The answer choices are also true even if they use outside knowledge, you just have to choose the AC that explains the casual relationship happening in the stimulus.
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
@areejkhan177 These questions give you a set of statements that are seemingly contradictory, or don't add up fully on their own. In this case, shark tooth fossils are super common among vertebrate fossils, but shark skeletons are rare compared to other vertebrate fossils. This is basically asking you to pick the answer choice that explains how/why shark teeth can be so common, while their skeletons are rare compared to other vertebrates.
Answer choice A explains this phenomenon because it states that shark skeletons are made of cartilage and not bone, unlike other vertebrates. It also says the cartilage does not fossilize as well compared to teeth and bones. This explains why shark teeth are common and shark skeletons are rare amongst vertebrate fossils.
112 comments
I answered incorrectly. For some reason I thought A was trying to say the shark's teeth were made of cartilage...
@lydmswe Dude, me too. I was debating if it was A or B, but then I realized that B talks about location, and I knew that was wrong lol.
Started watching the video because I thought you were gonna say the unbuttoning shirt bit </3
This might just be my favorite type of question
Just curious, is it okay to read the written explanation for some of these lessons as opposed to watching the video? Reading is faster, and I find I'm sometimes more attentive when actively reading than when I'm watching the videos.
@LSATKilla87 I don't think there's a certain rule for that, just do whatever works for you the best
@LSATKilla87 I always read and rarely watch the videos. For one, I'd rather exercise my reading muscles as much as I can since the LSAT is so reading intensive, and I can take better notes this way.
"I was curious, so I looked this up. On average, a shark produces 35,000 teeth over its lifetime. Each tooth is about a gram in weight. Over a lifetime, that's 35kg of teeth. Most sharks weigh between 680 and 1,800kg, with cartilage representing 6-8% of their total weight. That's 40-108kg. Even on the low end, skeletons still outweigh teeth."
What is this talking about. 25 fossilized shark teeth that weigh 1gram each outweighs the count of fossils compared to 1 shark skeleton that weighs 100kg.
Its talking about outweighing in terms of cardinality, not literal weight.
im annoyed at A being the answer because, sure it explains how fossilized shark skeletons are diff from other fossilized vertebraes (they're cartilage), but how can we just assume that the shark teeth are not cartilage? it doesn't really make clear the diff between shark teeth and shark skeleton for me, it only clears up fossilized shark skeleton vs others. am i allowed to just assume shark teeth are not cartilage based on the way A is written? i don't think that any of the other answer choices are any better than A, but I'm nervous to repeat the same issue I have with A on other questions.
@meepmorp yes. the statement says that teeth and bone are much more likely to fossilize than cartilage, so it is a very reasonable assumption to make that teeth are closer to bone than to cartilage in terms of its likelihood in fossilizing.
@meepmorp I think with these question types, it won't serve you best if you try to pick holes in the ACs. All ACs are equally "true" but we have to pick the one that is more acceptable to explain the phenomenon.
Damn I should have reread the stim. I see why it's A now.
I got it right! I was kind of confused on what cartilage is in terms of fossilization
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
@BriannaWells you and me are the same boat. If you start understanding these types of questions, let me know!
wait I don't understand this at all LOL
Can someone explain the concept of a naive assumption
@LSAT1011 I believe it's something we just assume using real world knowledge that an expert in the field or topic would otherwise not make. It's a common trap for the questions.
@LSAT1011 It is when you see two or more facts in a stimulus and assume something that isn’t stated. For example: “Conan is the best detective, yet his clearance rate is below average.” These two statements may seem confusing at first. How can Conan be the best detective if his clearance rate is low? This confusion comes from operating under a naive assumption—that if Conan is the best detective, his clearance rate must also be the highest. That assumption is what creates the apparent contradiction in your mind. The correct answer resolves this by breaking that assumption: “Conan gets the hardest cases.” Now it makes sense why Conan could have a below-average clearance rate. Hope that helps.
But I feel that A is taking outside information for the answer. How do we know that? It does not really explain it
@Mullinsc22 That's what makes this type of question different from the ones discussed earlier in the module! In RRE questions (among other types), we have to take the answer choices as true. This question stem even plainly states 'if true', as in if the following answer choices are true. Don't think about why A is true, but how it fits into the stimulus.
@Mullinsc22 Same! I thought the EXACT SAMEE WAY.
@Mullinsc22 You can use outside information for RRE questions! They are different from the previous modules. Just make sure the answer choice explains the casual relationships in the stimulus.
i love sharks
@VanillaCat Same!
@RachelB.P. cute babies
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.
@LegallyMinded you can trust the answer choices to be true, while the stimulus is also true. In RRE questions, the stimulus is true. The answer choices are also true even if they use outside knowledge, you just have to choose the AC that explains the casual relationship happening in the stimulus.
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.
@aleiapierre123 I feel this man
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
@StevenNoPH Agreed. Too much information is also repeated, causing the videos to be much longer than they need to be.
the people demand more shark questions kevin...
i fucking love sharks
@paulding77 fuck yeah
Sharks are my special interest.
@KennyB sharks are so cool :D
these are sooo much more intuitive to me than that formal logic mess
i genuinely don't get these. like these make negative sense.
@areejkhan177 These questions give you a set of statements that are seemingly contradictory, or don't add up fully on their own. In this case, shark tooth fossils are super common among vertebrate fossils, but shark skeletons are rare compared to other vertebrate fossils. This is basically asking you to pick the answer choice that explains how/why shark teeth can be so common, while their skeletons are rare compared to other vertebrates.
Answer choice A explains this phenomenon because it states that shark skeletons are made of cartilage and not bone, unlike other vertebrates. It also says the cartilage does not fossilize as well compared to teeth and bones. This explains why shark teeth are common and shark skeletons are rare amongst vertebrate fossils.
Hope this helps!