I think the issue with #5 is that most of us who got this wrong got caught up in, "there has been a surge in obesity rates." because it described the result of the fast food boom. I'm not gunna lie, I got excited and thought that was it, but I can see why it's not. The entire argument spoke about this surge and then all of a sudden introduced physical activity and dietary habits. It strung us along for some random conclusion, which was annoying, but nevertheless all of that stringing along was to explain why the surge can be attributed to decreased physical activity and changes in dietary habits.
@JaceGuinto95 im going to watch the video now and hopefully he explains it well because since getting it wrong ive re read it multiple times and still have zero clue how that was a premise to the conclusion.
1. The question of whether intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is certainly imprecise (why is it imprecise?), because (here is the reason why --- premise, making the imprecision statement the conclusion) we are not sure how different from us something might be and still count as “intelligent life.”
2. Fines levied against those responsible for certain environmentally damaging accidents are now so high that it costs a company responsible for such an accident more to pay the fine than it would have cost to adopt measures that would have prevented the accident (premise 1/fact about world). Therefore, since (focus on the since here, not the therefore) businesses value their profits (another true statement that is a premise), those that might have such accidents will now install adequate environmental safeguards. (everything the argument is designed to support this, making this the conclusion).
3. Since (premise indicator embedded in the sentence) public criticism of child-care services has undermined all confidence in such services, and since (oh wow! another embedded premise) such services are socially necessary, the government is certain to respond. (conclusion, the two statements that have the since indicator are supporting this statement)
4. The national savings rate of some of the most prosperous nations in the world will undoubtedly continue to decrease since (why should I believe it will decrease) the average age of these nations' populations continues to rise and older people have fewer reasons to save than do younger people (the statement before and after the 'and' make this a premise which makes the 'undoubtedly continue to decrease' statement the conclusion).
5. Researchers have found that since (this got me a little but this is more a fact about timing)the oil price increases of the 1970s, there has been a decline in home energy consumption. It follows (here is the author) that almost all of the decline has been achieved through reduced standards of living and changes in the way people spend their time (the author's conclusion that uses other people finding as his premise to make his own conclusion).
We're just identifying what's a premise and what's a conclusion. You're right that physical activities came out of nowhere. So the argument isn't convincing. But the word "consequently" tells us that the author thinks the last sentence follows from the first. So in the author's mind, it's a conclusion. It's what the author is trying to prove to us. Never mind that the argument is bad; we're just identifying what's a premise and what's a conclusion.
Ah nuts, only 4/5 this time. I assumed that the conclusion of Q5 was the short snipet about nutritionists seeing a surge in obesity rates with the support coming from the fast food boom, decreased activity, and dietary habits. I am a bit of an over-thinker so this one's definitely on me, bros
@DavidCollins It's not a convincing argument. But by using the word "consequently," the author of the argument is indicating that he thinks the 1st sentence is something that proves the second. That's why we can still call it an argument.
@Kevin_Lin so even if one of the premises is a restatement of a different author's claims-- as long as the author themselves is making the conclusion, we can call it an argument?
I feel slow trying to understand 5 lol. It makes 0 sense to me. How is he trying to prove almost all of a surge in obesity can be attributed to decreased physical activity and changes in dietary habits, from the fact that nutritionists noticed a surge in obesity after the fast food boom. These are not fully coorelated and the premise just doesnt support the conclusion well. Any tips?
@AshlynMiller Yeah I think the wording on this one is a little stupid lol. But using the premise/conclusion test, the conclusion of: "almost all of this surge can be attributed..." cannot be made without the premise. It refers to "this surge" and as small as it is, it is essential part of the argument that cannot be made without a premise. Even though the support that it gives is bad and there are multiple assumptions between the premise and the conclusion, meaning that it is a bad argument, the connection still exists for the argument chain.
I am confused on question 5. Those two sentences don't seem related to me, so how are they an argument in the first place? The first sentence is discussing fast food and the second, activity habits. They are both related to obesity rates but I don't see how the "premise" is supporting the conclusion?
@KateLevinson The fast food boom in the premise supports the "and changes in dietary habits" part of the conclusion. Like he said, it's not the most persuasive argument, but it is an argument because the premise does make (at least half of) the conclusion more likely to be true
For 5.1 and 5.2, both premises are merely correlations/observations. Both premises serve to support the conclusion of the causal relationship(s) between the two factors involved in each, respectively.
My personal thought is, were the indicators absent, the premises and conclusion could indeed flip, as a causal relationship indeed gives support to a correlation. However, "Consequently" in 5.1 and "It seems" in 5.2 indicate that what follows these two indicators is what the authors are seeking to support.
@MissProsecutor small world! haven't met too many Alia's, and here we are, both studying for the same thing at the same time!! love the internet. what a time to be alive for these types of coincidences to happen. wishing you all the best!!
@Aliakhan For sure, I also haven't met many Alia's (we're just that unique)! The internet can definitely bring people together. I wish you all the best too! 😊
What is the difference between a bad argument (with very little support and many assumptions) and a series of facts that is not considered an argument? is a spectrum or is there a district way to tell?
Thanks you! How do you discern if an author intends it as an argument? Sometimes its clear because the author will say "because of " but sometimes there is a collection of related facts and I find it hard to distinguish if the author is intending for the facts to support the conclusion. Is
#feedback Would love more detailed video explanations and more responses to the questions below the videos. It seems like for the past 3-4 skill builder lessons, there has been one question that's very confusing for many of us. I immediately check the questions below the video and can see many have asked for an explanation as to why the answer is correct, but there has not been a 7Sage response for months. I'm a new user so apologies if I am missing something. Is there a better place to find more detailed answers? I don't want to move on if I am confused, but I am also not sure if the videos or questions will ever be updated/answered. Thank you!
#help so in 5.2 I was thinking it was the opposite. i said the conclusion was that there has been increase in air pollution and I asked myself - why should i believe this? well because the increase resulted from combustion and industrial processes.
"It seems that almost all of this increase resulted from fossil fuel combustion and industrial processes" is the argument. In this passage, the author breaks from stating a fact and gives Their observation. They use environmentalists observation as support for their statement.
I believe the first statement just signifies a "fact". Remove the phrase "since the industrial revolution", and you have the statement "Environmentalists have discovered that there has been an increase in air pollution." This is not an argument/conclusive structure but "support/evidence" to something else--to the conclusion in the next statement/hypothesis.
212 comments
does anyone else wish we had a highlighting function for these skill builders? crying #feedback
yes!
Yup. Definitely. Wouldn't be too hard to implement either I'm guessing.
#help these r so long
4/5 That last one was tough!
@petvma completely agree. im sitting here rereading it and still dont get how that can be the premise to the conclusion.
question three was skipped
5/5 - okay small victories
I think the issue with #5 is that most of us who got this wrong got caught up in, "there has been a surge in obesity rates." because it described the result of the fast food boom. I'm not gunna lie, I got excited and thought that was it, but I can see why it's not. The entire argument spoke about this surge and then all of a sudden introduced physical activity and dietary habits. It strung us along for some random conclusion, which was annoying, but nevertheless all of that stringing along was to explain why the surge can be attributed to decreased physical activity and changes in dietary habits.
@JaceGuinto95 im going to watch the video now and hopefully he explains it well because since getting it wrong ive re read it multiple times and still have zero clue how that was a premise to the conclusion.
4/5. 5 really got me. I switched the conclusion and the premise and even second guessed if it was an argument
5/5, I think it's slowly starting to become intuition at this point which is great.
1. The question of whether intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is certainly imprecise (why is it imprecise?), because (here is the reason why --- premise, making the imprecision statement the conclusion) we are not sure how different from us something might be and still count as “intelligent life.”
2. Fines levied against those responsible for certain environmentally damaging accidents are now so high that it costs a company responsible for such an accident more to pay the fine than it would have cost to adopt measures that would have prevented the accident (premise 1/fact about world). Therefore, since (focus on the since here, not the therefore) businesses value their profits (another true statement that is a premise), those that might have such accidents will now install adequate environmental safeguards. (everything the argument is designed to support this, making this the conclusion).
3. Since (premise indicator embedded in the sentence) public criticism of child-care services has undermined all confidence in such services, and since (oh wow! another embedded premise) such services are socially necessary, the government is certain to respond. (conclusion, the two statements that have the since indicator are supporting this statement)
4. The national savings rate of some of the most prosperous nations in the world will undoubtedly continue to decrease since (why should I believe it will decrease) the average age of these nations' populations continues to rise and older people have fewer reasons to save than do younger people (the statement before and after the 'and' make this a premise which makes the 'undoubtedly continue to decrease' statement the conclusion).
5. Researchers have found that since (this got me a little but this is more a fact about timing)the oil price increases of the 1970s, there has been a decline in home energy consumption. It follows (here is the author) that almost all of the decline has been achieved through reduced standards of living and changes in the way people spend their time (the author's conclusion that uses other people finding as his premise to make his own conclusion).
I got confused with question 5 because physical activities were mentioned but there was no explanation/ premise mentioning it in the whole passage.
i was confused about this as well
Came here exactly for this, where is the support for physical activities
We're just identifying what's a premise and what's a conclusion. You're right that physical activities came out of nowhere. So the argument isn't convincing. But the word "consequently" tells us that the author thinks the last sentence follows from the first. So in the author's mind, it's a conclusion. It's what the author is trying to prove to us. Never mind that the argument is bad; we're just identifying what's a premise and what's a conclusion.
#help Is this one of those things where we use outside knowledge? Or is this just a poor argument?
This would be a poor argument. This is also where assumptions can be made. NEVER use outside knowledge on the LSAT.
i have the same question !
Ah nuts, only 4/5 this time. I assumed that the conclusion of Q5 was the short snipet about nutritionists seeing a surge in obesity rates with the support coming from the fast food boom, decreased activity, and dietary habits. I am a bit of an over-thinker so this one's definitely on me, bros
5 does not seem like an argument, he has no premise for decreased physical activity.
@DavidCollins It's not a convincing argument. But by using the word "consequently," the author of the argument is indicating that he thinks the 1st sentence is something that proves the second. That's why we can still call it an argument.
@Kevin_Lin so even if one of the premises is a restatement of a different author's claims-- as long as the author themselves is making the conclusion, we can call it an argument?
5/5!!!!
I feel slow trying to understand 5 lol. It makes 0 sense to me. How is he trying to prove almost all of a surge in obesity can be attributed to decreased physical activity and changes in dietary habits, from the fact that nutritionists noticed a surge in obesity after the fast food boom. These are not fully coorelated and the premise just doesnt support the conclusion well. Any tips?
@AshlynMiller Yeah I think the wording on this one is a little stupid lol. But using the premise/conclusion test, the conclusion of: "almost all of this surge can be attributed..." cannot be made without the premise. It refers to "this surge" and as small as it is, it is essential part of the argument that cannot be made without a premise. Even though the support that it gives is bad and there are multiple assumptions between the premise and the conclusion, meaning that it is a bad argument, the connection still exists for the argument chain.
I am confused on question 5. Those two sentences don't seem related to me, so how are they an argument in the first place? The first sentence is discussing fast food and the second, activity habits. They are both related to obesity rates but I don't see how the "premise" is supporting the conclusion?
@KateLevinson The fast food boom in the premise supports the "and changes in dietary habits" part of the conclusion. Like he said, it's not the most persuasive argument, but it is an argument because the premise does make (at least half of) the conclusion more likely to be true
@BenjaminBrady this helped thank you
For 5.1 and 5.2, both premises are merely correlations/observations. Both premises serve to support the conclusion of the causal relationship(s) between the two factors involved in each, respectively.
My personal thought is, were the indicators absent, the premises and conclusion could indeed flip, as a causal relationship indeed gives support to a correlation. However, "Consequently" in 5.1 and "It seems" in 5.2 indicate that what follows these two indicators is what the authors are seeking to support.
this lsat is going to be one humbling experience..... I got 4/5 but doubting yourself is easier i guess lol
@MissProsecutor that's true!
@Aliakhan a fellow Alia I see… -.-
@MissProsecutor small world! haven't met too many Alia's, and here we are, both studying for the same thing at the same time!! love the internet. what a time to be alive for these types of coincidences to happen. wishing you all the best!!
@Aliakhan For sure, I also haven't met many Alia's (we're just that unique)! The internet can definitely bring people together. I wish you all the best too! 😊
I feel so dumbbbbbb
I got it all correctly, but am worried because I feel like I'm not a fast reader.
What is the difference between a bad argument (with very little support and many assumptions) and a series of facts that is not considered an argument? is a spectrum or is there a district way to tell?
Thanks you! How do you discern if an author intends it as an argument? Sometimes its clear because the author will say "because of " but sometimes there is a collection of related facts and I find it hard to distinguish if the author is intending for the facts to support the conclusion. Is
@lizaloug97880 seconding!
#feedback Would love more detailed video explanations and more responses to the questions below the videos. It seems like for the past 3-4 skill builder lessons, there has been one question that's very confusing for many of us. I immediately check the questions below the video and can see many have asked for an explanation as to why the answer is correct, but there has not been a 7Sage response for months. I'm a new user so apologies if I am missing something. Is there a better place to find more detailed answers? I don't want to move on if I am confused, but I am also not sure if the videos or questions will ever be updated/answered. Thank you!
#help so in 5.2 I was thinking it was the opposite. i said the conclusion was that there has been increase in air pollution and I asked myself - why should i believe this? well because the increase resulted from combustion and industrial processes.
"It seems that almost all of this increase resulted from fossil fuel combustion and industrial processes" is the argument. In this passage, the author breaks from stating a fact and gives Their observation. They use environmentalists observation as support for their statement.
I thought the same thing, but I realized that the word "seems" here is used to indicate that it is the conclusion.
I believe the first statement just signifies a "fact". Remove the phrase "since the industrial revolution", and you have the statement "Environmentalists have discovered that there has been an increase in air pollution." This is not an argument/conclusive structure but "support/evidence" to something else--to the conclusion in the next statement/hypothesis.
5/5
5/5 ! It's also nice to see everyone's progress from the first of this kind of exercise to now!
Question 3 isn't in the explanation video, but shouldn't it be broken into two premises?
Premise 1: Since the residents' reviews about the new park have been exceptionally good
Premise 2: because this park is vital for their community interaction
Conclusion: the city council will definitely consider its expansion.