Might be a dumb question, but why is there so much emphasis on "premise > conclusion" and "phenomenon > hypothesis"? Is there a major difference or can I just think of them as the same thing?
This is embarrassing but I had no idea how to do this one. I couldn't figure out how musical training was relevant at all to the genetics of perfect pitch.
@SeanWolfe These questions are definitely difficult for me as well! I looked at it like this:
The conclusion/hypothesis states that genetics cause perfect pitch. As it is a strengthening question, we want to find an alternative hypothesis and then rule it out, thus strengthening the support.
So let's just say we are looking for a competing hypothesis that says some other factor, X, causes perfect pitch.
Perhaps X could be music training? It would totally make sense that some expensive music lessons would lead to cool musical capabilities like perfect pitch, right?
Except answer choice A undermines this hypothesis. It states that people who have relatives with perfect pitch (genetically) generally receive no more musical training than do others.
So it is not the case that X (music training) causes perfect pitch.
Thus, we have effectively identified an alternative hypothesis and then eliminated said hypothesis' credibility, strengthening the original hypothesis.
A - We need to strengthen the conclusion that genetics are a factor in perfect pitch. Answer choice A proposes that people with perfect pitch don't receive more training than other people which strengthens the argument that pitch is genetic. Completed in 35 secs and correct on first try.
@MelanieGonzalez info in the ACs, like in RRE questions, are meant to be taken as true.
AC A's litmus test that worked for me was asking "How do I know that having perfect pitch is likely genetic? Well, it's because if I took Jim here (star athlete in 4th grade with no formal music training but perfect pitch "runs in the family") and compared him to Sarah (multi-state honor choir champion with formal musical training), Jim is likely to have perfect pitch (and so is Sarah, but most likely due to her musical background assuming she has no relatives with perfect pitch).
(A) boosts the weight of the support for the argument in showing that someone with little to no musical training can inherently possess (through genetics) the very skill that others who train their musical muscles strive for.
@aidamaeee04 i think it helps to identify the conclusion and just ask yourself "how does this help/strengthen it" it would also help in eliminating answers since you know what you're looking for...
I was able to narrow it down to A and D. I think I was confusing familial environment with genes. In the end, I was able to parse out A as the correct answer, but I took double the time I was supposed to target. Tricky...🫤
If anything, D makes it more reasonable to assume that perfect pitch is instead something that people who are related to each other learn, as opposed to it being due to genetics as the argument suggests. Something that may help for future reference would be to imagine adding the answer choice as a premise to the argument. Then, read it over in comparison to the original argument. Does the conclusion follow more strongly now (less assumptions, less possible alternate explanations), or do you find it harder to believe the conclusion is true now? So while for these strengthen questions we are trying to find the answer choice that enhances the ability for us to believe the truth of the conclusion, D in this case does the opposite. It tries to explain the phenomenon (alot more people with perfect pitch seem to be related, than not related) by pointing us to the fact that parents make their kids learn music and that is how they could potentially learn perfect pitch, therefore it is not genetic, and weakening the authors argument.
D states that there is something other than genetics which influences whether or not people have perfect pitch. This provides evidence against the hypothesis bc it is not a factor of genetics.
I was stuck between A and D but I chose A because D was attempting to give an explanation rather than expanding/strengthening the stimulus hypothesis(genetics).
Was stuck between A and D. Did not choose A because I assumed "others" would be an alternative. Me thinks, "who are the others?". Chose D. Was wrong. :')
Was stuck between A and D. Did not choose A because I assumed "others" would be an alternative. Me thinks, "who are the others?". Chose D. Was wrong. :')
D weakens because: if the child has to go through training (that the child is related to someone with perfect pitch), then answer choice is saying that said child has no perfect pitch.
79 comments
Lol, I feel dumb.
how does A "stretghen" the argument? who cares about how much training they get?
Denying an alternative hypothesis FTW
Thank you for reminding me of another skill that I dont have
Might be a dumb question, but why is there so much emphasis on "premise > conclusion" and "phenomenon > hypothesis"? Is there a major difference or can I just think of them as the same thing?
@LSATKilla87 They are the same thing. All theses questions basically follow this format.
This is embarrassing but I had no idea how to do this one. I couldn't figure out how musical training was relevant at all to the genetics of perfect pitch.
@SeanWolfe These questions are definitely difficult for me as well! I looked at it like this:
The conclusion/hypothesis states that genetics cause perfect pitch. As it is a strengthening question, we want to find an alternative hypothesis and then rule it out, thus strengthening the support.
So let's just say we are looking for a competing hypothesis that says some other factor, X, causes perfect pitch.
Perhaps X could be music training? It would totally make sense that some expensive music lessons would lead to cool musical capabilities like perfect pitch, right?
Except answer choice A undermines this hypothesis. It states that people who have relatives with perfect pitch (genetically) generally receive no more musical training than do others.
So it is not the case that X (music training) causes perfect pitch.
Thus, we have effectively identified an alternative hypothesis and then eliminated said hypothesis' credibility, strengthening the original hypothesis.
I hope this helps a bit!
A - We need to strengthen the conclusion that genetics are a factor in perfect pitch. Answer choice A proposes that people with perfect pitch don't receive more training than other people which strengthens the argument that pitch is genetic. Completed in 35 secs and correct on first try.
I'm an idiot. I just weakened that argument in 30 seconds and was so confident. I literally thought it was a weaken the argument question.
Another question answered correct LETS GO!
But how do we know that those people in A DO have a perfect pitch?
@MelanieGonzalez info in the ACs, like in RRE questions, are meant to be taken as true.
AC A's litmus test that worked for me was asking "How do I know that having perfect pitch is likely genetic? Well, it's because if I took Jim here (star athlete in 4th grade with no formal music training but perfect pitch "runs in the family") and compared him to Sarah (multi-state honor choir champion with formal musical training), Jim is likely to have perfect pitch (and so is Sarah, but most likely due to her musical background assuming she has no relatives with perfect pitch).
(A) boosts the weight of the support for the argument in showing that someone with little to no musical training can inherently possess (through genetics) the very skill that others who train their musical muscles strive for.
I was stuck between A and D and chose D but then chose A in BR and got it right. Strengthen questions are nott my strong suit
@aidamaeee04 i think it helps to identify the conclusion and just ask yourself "how does this help/strengthen it" it would also help in eliminating answers since you know what you're looking for...
@JessOk Thank you!!
I had to do POE rather than Hunting like the instructor did
The wording for the answer was so confusing even though I got it right. Grammar really is important.
@kimwexler I originally marked it off, marked off every other answer, than reread A and realized I had read it wrong.
Helps if you read the answer fully, that "no" in the second half of the answer is really important.
@JakobYeager lol same, I totally skipped that
finally got one right .. and its lowest difficulty 😂
@mzughaerr You're doing great mate
the correct answer is A for Antares!
I hate myself
on a rolllll
These are kicking my ass
I was able to narrow it down to A and D. I think I was confusing familial environment with genes. In the end, I was able to parse out A as the correct answer, but I took double the time I was supposed to target. Tricky...🫤
I still dont get why not D?
How does it weaken the argument?
I get A relates to genetics so thats the correct answer but i dont get why we eliminated D
ahh i got it now! This helped a lot thank you so much
This is a strengthening question. You need to pick the AC that supports and enhances the relationship between the premises and conclusion.
If anything, D makes it more reasonable to assume that perfect pitch is instead something that people who are related to each other learn, as opposed to it being due to genetics as the argument suggests. Something that may help for future reference would be to imagine adding the answer choice as a premise to the argument. Then, read it over in comparison to the original argument. Does the conclusion follow more strongly now (less assumptions, less possible alternate explanations), or do you find it harder to believe the conclusion is true now? So while for these strengthen questions we are trying to find the answer choice that enhances the ability for us to believe the truth of the conclusion, D in this case does the opposite. It tries to explain the phenomenon (alot more people with perfect pitch seem to be related, than not related) by pointing us to the fact that parents make their kids learn music and that is how they could potentially learn perfect pitch, therefore it is not genetic, and weakening the authors argument.
D states that there is something other than genetics which influences whether or not people have perfect pitch. This provides evidence against the hypothesis bc it is not a factor of genetics.
I was stuck between A and D but I chose A because D was attempting to give an explanation rather than expanding/strengthening the stimulus hypothesis(genetics).
Was stuck between A and D. Did not choose A because I assumed "others" would be an alternative. Me thinks, "who are the others?". Chose D. Was wrong. :')
Was stuck between A and D. Did not choose A because I assumed "others" would be an alternative. Me thinks, "who are the others?". Chose D. Was wrong. :')
D weakens because: if the child has to go through training (that the child is related to someone with perfect pitch), then answer choice is saying that said child has no perfect pitch.
I see it now.
Got 1/5 difficulty right in 2 minutes #Roadto180
real