@GDatria715 I think introducing this new X factor (info the hypothesis speaker has not yet considered) is meant to get the wheels turning in your head. What is this argument missing? We know it is untrue, but WHAT makes it untrue? That's how I interpreted it, at least
This question was so straightforward that I convinced myself I was missing something because I kept getting E as the answer. I thought it was a trick question, spent 10 minutes second-guessing myself, and eventually just chose E out of frustration.....I was so shocked when I saw the difficulty level.......BTW... if you got this question wrong, you probably just misread the stimulus because it's kind of confusing. (Same thing happened to me.)
I'm finding it hard to find the line between disproving a conclusion (hyp) or just weakening the conclusion. I still don't see the difference. Cause it seems the Correct AC should be a conclusion that will still make the premises make sense/work. Almost pretending that we never got the conclusion in the stimulus? #help
Also, is D trying to bait us into assuming that the high-spenders are bus users, and, if we grant this assumption, that Travallier is trying to target existing customers rather than new ones? Would be forced to make a lot of assumptions, but curious if that was the trap the test-makers were going for
My line of thinking: New stuff in conclusion = bad. The conclusion says it must be that they're looking for new customers based on their current customers' preferences. So, once I noted that relationship b/w current and new, and the hypothesis being about new, then I tried to search for one that affirms that it is actually the current customers who are being served. E does that.
@cheriepea I think of these questions like a Jenga tower. You are trying to figure out where is the weak point in the argument is like in the Jenga tower you pull out the block that is weaker than the rest.
@Mina.G Really? I thought that (E) totally weakened the conclusion. Because the conc. says that by hiring the bus tour people they are trying to expand their NEW consumer base. But (E) says well actually no they're just trying to get their EXISTING consumers to change their habits.
I started to get the correct answers for RRE and WSE questions once I knew where to focus on the stimulus. For instance, in this question, the stimulus concludes "Travailler must be attempting to enlarge its consumer base by attracting new customers". This shows us that the LSAT writers want us to focus on that there should be an alternative explanation for the company to hire employees with experience in the bus tour industry. Despite the fact that their consumer base has always been traveling by air. By focusing on what the LSAT writers want us to focus on, I could easily cross out the answers that were completely irrelevant.
@iriswu84153 Okay, so it's good to know I am not the only one who thinks of the question like this. I always look at it like "Which one of these answer choices is the better conclusion for this stimulus?" .. I have found this to be extremely helpful.
Basically the company wants to expand their consumer base by accepting new clients. Why? Because they want to charter busses and do bus tours. Why is that an issue? Because Unfortunately their already existing clients prefer to travel via airplane. So the company believes that if they have new consumers then they will automatically prefer to travel via bus instead of by plane like the existing consumers. So, What weakens their Argument of “if our old consumers prefer to fly via plane then we’ll just get new customers and they’ll want to travel via bus?” It would be E because it was never stated that the existing consumers wouldn't change their mind and or be open to another method of travel so it would make sense for the company to implement new additions to the company with their already existing consumers first. Just because they prefer to travel 1 way doesn’t mean they can’t change their minds.
I suck at explaining but i like to translate everything in my own words and see what the phenomenon is. basically i like to get to the point and from there it is much easier to weaken their argument when you know what their argument actually is. I can explain better if i confused you but i hope i semi helped
E: Expand by introducing their current customers to new products and services.
The stimulus says their focus is on expanding its current customer base whereas E says their focus is on expanding their business via current customers, which is what makes it right.
99 comments
I had E originally then changed ittttt
makes no sense. How are we supposed to know about the consultants in E when theres no mention of anything of the sort
@GDatria715 I think introducing this new X factor (info the hypothesis speaker has not yet considered) is meant to get the wheels turning in your head. What is this argument missing? We know it is untrue, but WHAT makes it untrue? That's how I interpreted it, at least
im noticing a pattern in these kinds of questions in terms of wrong answer choices
they often give us information about another group that baits us into making the unwarranted assumption that they are analogously similar
e.g., --> stim is about Company A, and the answer choice tells us about its competitor, Company B
how do we know the two are analogous?
like RRE wrong ACs, they add another layer to the phenomenon that, in this case, failes to weaken the explantion
like RRE wrong ACs, they address only part of the argument (weaken it), and leave the other part (s) open to being true
This question was so straightforward that I convinced myself I was missing something because I kept getting E as the answer. I thought it was a trick question, spent 10 minutes second-guessing myself, and eventually just chose E out of frustration.....I was so shocked when I saw the difficulty level.......BTW... if you got this question wrong, you probably just misread the stimulus because it's kind of confusing. (Same thing happened to me.)
I picked C at first but got it on blind review. Realized I didn't read E carefully.
@SeanWolfe C) is like those ones that only resolve half the phenomena.
I'm finding it hard to find the line between disproving a conclusion (hyp) or just weakening the conclusion. I still don't see the difference. Cause it seems the Correct AC should be a conclusion that will still make the premises make sense/work. Almost pretending that we never got the conclusion in the stimulus? #help
Also, is D trying to bait us into assuming that the high-spenders are bus users, and, if we grant this assumption, that Travallier is trying to target existing customers rather than new ones? Would be forced to make a lot of assumptions, but curious if that was the trap the test-makers were going for
My line of thinking: New stuff in conclusion = bad. The conclusion says it must be that they're looking for new customers based on their current customers' preferences. So, once I noted that relationship b/w current and new, and the hypothesis being about new, then I tried to search for one that affirms that it is actually the current customers who are being served. E does that.
I think of these as the conclusion given is wrong. Which answer is what ACTUALLY happened. Might bite me in the butt? but it seems to work.
I do not understand the concept of these questions at all... what am I missing!
@cheriepea I think of these questions like a Jenga tower. You are trying to figure out where is the weak point in the argument is like in the Jenga tower you pull out the block that is weaker than the rest.
Wow I’m surprised I got it right
I understood the stimulus and got it right, but - this seems like a strength question because AC, E explains the gap between the new employees.
@Mina.G Really? I thought that (E) totally weakened the conclusion. Because the conc. says that by hiring the bus tour people they are trying to expand their NEW consumer base. But (E) says well actually no they're just trying to get their EXISTING consumers to change their habits.
37 seconds over on timing but I got this one right!
I started to get the correct answers for RRE and WSE questions once I knew where to focus on the stimulus. For instance, in this question, the stimulus concludes "Travailler must be attempting to enlarge its consumer base by attracting new customers". This shows us that the LSAT writers want us to focus on that there should be an alternative explanation for the company to hire employees with experience in the bus tour industry. Despite the fact that their consumer base has always been traveling by air. By focusing on what the LSAT writers want us to focus on, I could easily cross out the answers that were completely irrelevant.
@JiyoonLim I agree, one thing I am reminding myself is which answer will offer an alternative hypothesis which aligns with the stimulus
this is confusing :/
It has been tremendously helpful for me to think "What is an alternative hypothesis to the stim?" rather than "what weakens the argument"
@iriswu84153 Okay, so it's good to know I am not the only one who thinks of the question like this. I always look at it like "Which one of these answer choices is the better conclusion for this stimulus?" .. I have found this to be extremely helpful.
I know these and flaws are my weakest sections on LR so right now I am not goiong for time but instead for unnderstanding.
I got this right!
Taught E Strength at first
Oh Weakening questions will be my downfall...
C was tempting. But I went with E. But the explanation for C being wrong is still confusing to me. Can someone please explain?
This was tough but I understand now. E weakens the argument because the answer choice focuses on CURRENT CUSTOMERS and not NEW CUSTOMERS
@EthanSegerman That's what threw me. I didn't read it closely enough---I was trying for time. This was a hard one, too.
Can anyone help explain this?
@SoniaKulkarni
Basically the company wants to expand their consumer base by accepting new clients. Why? Because they want to charter busses and do bus tours. Why is that an issue? Because Unfortunately their already existing clients prefer to travel via airplane. So the company believes that if they have new consumers then they will automatically prefer to travel via bus instead of by plane like the existing consumers. So, What weakens their Argument of “if our old consumers prefer to fly via plane then we’ll just get new customers and they’ll want to travel via bus?” It would be E because it was never stated that the existing consumers wouldn't change their mind and or be open to another method of travel so it would make sense for the company to implement new additions to the company with their already existing consumers first. Just because they prefer to travel 1 way doesn’t mean they can’t change their minds.
I suck at explaining but i like to translate everything in my own words and see what the phenomenon is. basically i like to get to the point and from there it is much easier to weaken their argument when you know what their argument actually is. I can explain better if i confused you but i hope i semi helped
Feels good to get these higher difficulty questions in right around a minute!
Stimulus: Expand by attracting new customers.
E: Expand by introducing their current customers to new products and services.
The stimulus says their focus is on expanding its current customer base whereas E says their focus is on expanding their business via current customers, which is what makes it right.
@sheadongraham Great summary!
So proud of myself for getting this right WOOOOOO