smart time usage when taking the test, but on blind review it's best to be able to explain why the wrong answers are wrong and the right answer is right.
Yes, the relation between smoking and cancer is general knowledge but I hate that the writers pick and choose what assumptions are reasonable and what is not. In one question we say "do not make any assumptions" and in the other one we say "well that's basic knowledge". How am I supposed to know what the writer believes is reasonable??!!!
This question throws me off so badly because I thought we have to throw out real world knowledge when it comes to lsat questions so we don't get influenced to answer another way. Now E is requiring us to use our real life knowledge as proof that it is right.... my brraainnnn
@Julietb07I defiently understand but like he said, it's fair game to know that smoking cigarettes causes more cancer than it doesn't. Especially given the presumption of truth even though it's still the wrong answer choice.
I have noticed that in many of the videos the explanations are extremely long and confusing and often make no sense. We will not have time to do that on the test so it would be beneficial to have a simplified explanation. #feedback
I agree on one hand that some of these videos are a bit convoluted and can seem to add to the confusion rather. But on the other hand, there is a reason these videos are longer and include much more detail. They are part of the core curriculum which is intended for those seeking to learn the process more in depth. Its important to gain a full comprehension before someone attempts to take timing into account.
If you want a shorter video explanation, go to the actual video explanation. For example, this questions explanation is simplified down in 6minutes
I 100% agree. It is so convoluted and long. I am tempted to just read the description or Google the explanations, as this is getting to be a pattern with these explanations.
WOW! I totally assumed the implied hypothesis that the foods w BC were just that much better than the supplements in providing BC. I totally did not see (E) coming and denying that implicit hypothesis while also resolving the discrepancy. Great question, great answer. tricky tricky
If you're struggling with understanding why E is wrong and D is right, don't be alarmed. It took me 45+ minutes (after coming back to this the next day) for me to dissect and understand it. E is a bit convoluted
Ultimately, E is wrong because it's offering a hypothesis that explains the passage, which would resolve the discrepancy (but we're looking for the one that does NOT resolve the discrepancy). It just happens to be an alternative hypothesis. E is saying that beta-carotene just happened to correlate with health outcomes from smoking. E is saying beta-careotene doesn't actually have an impact on health outcomes. Instead, E is saying smokers who ALSO happened to eat low beta-carotene were a bigger group in the study than smokers who also happened to eat high beta-carotene. Either way, smoking is bad for you, but the results being that low-beta carotene correlated with likelihood of cancer and heart disease can actually be attributed to the fact that there was a larger group of smokers in the study who ALSO happened to eat low-beta carotene.
It would be nice to see how you would approach a question like this with long answers like E in real time, as if you were doing the question on test day, #feedback
On these kinds of questions I’ve noticed whenever I read a choice and think wtf does that have to do with anything, it’s usually because it’s the right answer.
D is the right answer and they want you to glaze over how it says that half of people are given the pill and half are given a fake one, because they want you assume that that equates no change. However, it doesn't resolve anything. That's like saying that 1/2 of a study took a red pill, 1/2 of a study took a blue pill, and claiming that that explains why nobody had any changes by taking the red pill.
159 comments
The LSAT test makers and Satan collabed together to create "except" questions.
@AnthonyRojas lmao
Maybe I took the easy route here because, after I'd concluded D didn't reconcile, I looked at E and said I ain't reading all that.
smart time usage when taking the test, but on blind review it's best to be able to explain why the wrong answers are wrong and the right answer is right.
As soon as I start feeling confident, I get humbled :(
Yes, the relation between smoking and cancer is general knowledge but I hate that the writers pick and choose what assumptions are reasonable and what is not. In one question we say "do not make any assumptions" and in the other one we say "well that's basic knowledge". How am I supposed to know what the writer believes is reasonable??!!!
I just talked to a Big Tobacco lawyer and they said it was E 🤷♂️
feeling stupid as the 22% who picked e lmaoooo
thats fine at least this is a level 4 question
same here.
boy do I love when im trying to learn a new question type and we return to an old one to stop me from learning the new type
RRE is my nemesis.
This question throws me off so badly because I thought we have to throw out real world knowledge when it comes to lsat questions so we don't get influenced to answer another way. Now E is requiring us to use our real life knowledge as proof that it is right.... my brraainnnn
@Julietb07 I defiently understand but like he said, it's fair game to know that smoking cigarettes causes more cancer than it doesn't. Especially given the presumption of truth even though it's still the wrong answer choice.
@Julietb07 it still works to resolve the discrepancy even if it requires assumptions
I have noticed that in many of the videos the explanations are extremely long and confusing and often make no sense. We will not have time to do that on the test so it would be beneficial to have a simplified explanation. #feedback
#feedback I agree
I agree on one hand that some of these videos are a bit convoluted and can seem to add to the confusion rather. But on the other hand, there is a reason these videos are longer and include much more detail. They are part of the core curriculum which is intended for those seeking to learn the process more in depth. Its important to gain a full comprehension before someone attempts to take timing into account.
If you want a shorter video explanation, go to the actual video explanation. For example, this questions explanation is simplified down in 6minutes
https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-62-section-4-question-17/
I 100% agree. It is so convoluted and long. I am tempted to just read the description or Google the explanations, as this is getting to be a pattern with these explanations.
WOW! I totally assumed the implied hypothesis that the foods w BC were just that much better than the supplements in providing BC. I totally did not see (E) coming and denying that implicit hypothesis while also resolving the discrepancy. Great question, great answer. tricky tricky
sheesh
If you're struggling with understanding why E is wrong and D is right, don't be alarmed. It took me 45+ minutes (after coming back to this the next day) for me to dissect and understand it. E is a bit convoluted
Ultimately, E is wrong because it's offering a hypothesis that explains the passage, which would resolve the discrepancy (but we're looking for the one that does NOT resolve the discrepancy). It just happens to be an alternative hypothesis. E is saying that beta-carotene just happened to correlate with health outcomes from smoking. E is saying beta-careotene doesn't actually have an impact on health outcomes. Instead, E is saying smokers who ALSO happened to eat low beta-carotene were a bigger group in the study than smokers who also happened to eat high beta-carotene. Either way, smoking is bad for you, but the results being that low-beta carotene correlated with likelihood of cancer and heart disease can actually be attributed to the fact that there was a larger group of smokers in the study who ALSO happened to eat low-beta carotene.
It would be nice to see how you would approach a question like this with long answers like E in real time, as if you were doing the question on test day, #feedback
I don't know why these except questions are so hard for me :(
not sure how i get every question with higher difficulty right, but then none of the "easy" ones
I FORGOT THAT IT SAID EXCEPTTT
Understanding E broke my brain
They really need to bold the except lol
anyone else struggling with rre? >.> i barely get any of the questions correct and i'd be lucky if i get it right on blind review. advice?
On these kinds of questions I’ve noticed whenever I read a choice and think wtf does that have to do with anything, it’s usually because it’s the right answer.
not me switching from right to wrong omg
Took me 12 minutes but got it right first try and correct on BR. Sigh
For these type of questions: "Except..." the correct answer will be contrary to stimulus's conclusion and or will not be supported by the stimulus!
I literally was hovering over D and then clicked E because I was like what does smoking have to do with anything. GAH. This question was so dumb
D is the right answer and they want you to glaze over how it says that half of people are given the pill and half are given a fake one, because they want you assume that that equates no change. However, it doesn't resolve anything. That's like saying that 1/2 of a study took a red pill, 1/2 of a study took a blue pill, and claiming that that explains why nobody had any changes by taking the red pill.
Thank you for this comment! I feel into the category of choosing E, but your explanation makes so much sense as to how I feel for the trick here!!