I have been studying part-time for about a year now and am only now starting to feel confident and consistent in my abilities to pick apart these questions. I was overjoyed to hear JY reflect my thoughts when reading the stimuli and answer choices here. Give yourself grace and be patient if you are struggling!
from the last lesson - "Unfortunately, there's no reliable way to predict from looking just at the stimulus whether a particular question will test causal or "non-causal" assumptions. The reveal takes place only after you're deep in the answers."
@tygene Honestly one of the things I do that helps me is to imagine someone annoying arguing with ne and I have to nitpick their arguments. In this case there's a massive flaw in the argument once you consider that most of the worlds population of dinos lived near the impact.
I was thinking this as well, though in the grammar section he mentions that "most" can actually mean up to 100%. I think its 51-100%. So it likely to be true that all of them were killed. Also In question E, the answer choice says "in or near" which likely means they all died compared to, for example, "in, near, and a few far away" or something.
@maciascarmen6455 As the other person said, your priority rating is based on whether you personally got it right originally, in blind review, or not at all.
The difficulty rating is based on the average score of other people. The middle score is where 50% of people with that score got it right, the lower score is where only 25% of people with that score got it right, and the high score is where 75% of people with that score got it right.
In this one, 25% of people with a score of 139 got it right, 50% of people with a score of 147 got it right, and 75% of people with a score of 154 got it right.
@maciascarmen6455 hey three or higher is an automatic wind for me. Anything lower as well like I should’ve gotten it right which is just a Hit to my self-esteemif I miss.
@JRamirez I overcame this issue by basically putting everything in a box and everything outside of that box doesn’t exist . That means that I focus primarily on first keywords that I’m supposed to look for based on the type of question or answer that I’m looking at. If the keywords don’t do me much for me then I will do process of elimination on the obvious ones that it cannot be and then work my way argument back again
I got this question correct but I spent longer on it than I wanted to. I think it's because I had a hard time figuring out what the author's conclusion actually was. I couldn't figure out if the conclusion was that "the asteroid wouldn't have a worldwide effect" or "the asteroid didn't kill all the dinos". I see now that the worldwide effect is a part of the assumption there but it took longer to realize that for me. I ended up picking E because it was the one that made the most sense.
@julienneabing588 I made the mistake of assuming the conclusion was that the asteroid strike could not have a worldwide effect. I picked B because based on that conclusion, just because there are other larger craters does not mean that they were deadly enough to cause an extinction in comparison to the chick-uh-whatever. I just need to review the question stem more carefully to find out what the actual conclusion was.
This one I was able to intuit the answer choice before I even read it. In my head, I was already thinking, "OK, but what if all or most of the dinosaurs at that time lived in that region?"
Same, because it said "around the time many of the last dinosaur species were becoming extinct" I immediately thought "ah so the rest of the dinos around the world are probably gone and its just these guys left around Mexico"
Find answer that supports/weakens your summation depending on the question.
I've also noticed that some wrong answers can introduce unnecessary info/ideas/nouns, are just too crazy, or too forward in quantifier verbiage.
Lastly, some correct answers for weaken introduce a new idea/total opposite whereas some strengthen answers do not restate verbatim its premises/conclusions, but are roughly similar/allude to them.
I originally picked c and I understand now that it was already accounted for in the stimulus, but I still have no idea why e is the correct answer. Can someone explain it in a different way? #help
The explanations are good for why E is the right answer.
But, just in case it did not stand out to you. Be on the lookout for modifiers that give you a specific quantifier either in the stimulus or in the answer choices. This really helps me.
I was immediately able to rule out Answer C because it simply says the meteor was responsible for a number of dinosaur fossils. The modifier "a number" is nowhere near strong enough to allow us to reasonably infer that the meteor is responsible for "most" of the dinosaur fossils. "A number" could just as easily mean one or two fossils.
for me, I remembered what J said in previous lessons- to always take the answers in the stem as "being true" and see if it weakens the argument. Of course, if it goes directly against what the stimulus said then its not the right answer but in this case I thought, "ah! Ok I have to take it as true that the dinosaurs lived in the impact area and according to the stimulus- it said they would become extinct only in the impact area so then it has to be true!" hope this might help.
I was between E & C when working through the question. E stuck out to me because it provided direct proof that the conclusion of the stimulus was wrong. The overall argument of the stimulus is that this meteor did not cause a mass extinction event of dinosaurs. The argument is based on a premise that this meteor could not have had a global impact. Assuming E is true, it provides evidence against the argument by saying the meteor did not need to have a global impact since most of the dinosaurs on the planet lived in the immediate area of meteor's impact.
That’s a great explanation. Especially because when he goes over why C is bad, he selectively does not discuss “probably” from the stimulus…or maybe I am missing something there .
Probably definitely lowers the bar needed to prove the conclusion of an argument since it factors in some room for error.
But, I actually don't think probably ends up being a major player here in this question. It is good to keep an eye out for though, because it will be an issue in future questions!
All I was saying is that stating that "a number" of dinosaurs clearly died because of the asteroid is not sufficient to prove "most" of the worlds dinosaurs died from the asteroid.
The mystery "number" of fossils we are looking for in Answer choice C has just as much of a chance of being less than half than it does of being more than half. In order for C to have a chance of being right, you have to make an unwarranted assumption that the number is more than half, which is not supported by the stimulus in any way.
I think the beauty of E is also that it uses the premises against the argument. The argument says that the strike can kill many organisms nearby, but it doesn't impact organisms worldwide beyond that limited range. But if most of the world's dinosaurs live within that limited range (nearby the strike), then yes, the Chicxulub asteroid did cause many of the last dinosaur species to go extinct.
92 comments
JY I just wanna say I love you. You make studying for the LSAT much more tolerable.
Search "Chicxulub" on google and you will not be disappointed
Can confirm. I was not disappointed.
:D that was cool
All the dinosaurs lived in Mexico hehe
awuebo
jaja
haha
I have been studying part-time for about a year now and am only now starting to feel confident and consistent in my abilities to pick apart these questions. I was overjoyed to hear JY reflect my thoughts when reading the stimuli and answer choices here. Give yourself grace and be patient if you are struggling!
I do better when I read rather than watch the lesson. Is anyone else experiencing that?
#question How do we distinguish between WSE questions that rely on causal logic and questions that don't
from the last lesson - "Unfortunately, there's no reliable way to predict from looking just at the stimulus whether a particular question will test causal or "non-causal" assumptions. The reveal takes place only after you're deep in the answers."
idk im so lost T^T
@tygene Honestly one of the things I do that helps me is to imagine someone annoying arguing with ne and I have to nitpick their arguments. In this case there's a massive flaw in the argument once you consider that most of the worlds population of dinos lived near the impact.
My problem is I think I rush my thinking a bit too much, I need to slow down and take all the information in….
Am I correct in thinking that this question basically comes down entirely to the use of "most?"
I was thinking this as well, though in the grammar section he mentions that "most" can actually mean up to 100%. I think its 51-100%. So it likely to be true that all of them were killed. Also In question E, the answer choice says "in or near" which likely means they all died compared to, for example, "in, near, and a few far away" or something.
Any time I get one right I get excited and then see that it is always a low priority question
priority depends on whether u get it right or wrong
@maciascarmen6455 As the other person said, your priority rating is based on whether you personally got it right originally, in blind review, or not at all.
The difficulty rating is based on the average score of other people. The middle score is where 50% of people with that score got it right, the lower score is where only 25% of people with that score got it right, and the high score is where 75% of people with that score got it right.
In this one, 25% of people with a score of 139 got it right, 50% of people with a score of 147 got it right, and 75% of people with a score of 154 got it right.
@maciascarmen6455 hey three or higher is an automatic wind for me. Anything lower as well like I should’ve gotten it right which is just a Hit to my self-esteemif I miss.
Getting easier the more I do!
I am struggling with this entire unit so bad. I do nottttt get these questions at all.
Same
Keep drilling and reviewing, it will click!
me too! Its not making sense in my head UGH
same :/ feeling defeated
C was so attractive but had to reread the stimulus first before I got to the correct answer--just 1min over (ugh)(
Stupid internal assumptions!
@JRamirez I overcame this issue by basically putting everything in a box and everything outside of that box doesn’t exist . That means that I focus primarily on first keywords that I’m supposed to look for based on the type of question or answer that I’m looking at. If the keywords don’t do me much for me then I will do process of elimination on the obvious ones that it cannot be and then work my way argument back again
Mr. Worldwide
Was between D AND E AND CHOSE D :(
This one makes more sense to me than the previous 2 100%
I got this question correct but I spent longer on it than I wanted to. I think it's because I had a hard time figuring out what the author's conclusion actually was. I couldn't figure out if the conclusion was that "the asteroid wouldn't have a worldwide effect" or "the asteroid didn't kill all the dinos". I see now that the worldwide effect is a part of the assumption there but it took longer to realize that for me. I ended up picking E because it was the one that made the most sense.
@julienneabing588 I made the mistake of assuming the conclusion was that the asteroid strike could not have a worldwide effect. I picked B because based on that conclusion, just because there are other larger craters does not mean that they were deadly enough to cause an extinction in comparison to the chick-uh-whatever. I just need to review the question stem more carefully to find out what the actual conclusion was.
@AidanDelong0725 *stimulus
This one I was able to intuit the answer choice before I even read it. In my head, I was already thinking, "OK, but what if all or most of the dinosaurs at that time lived in that region?"
Same, because it said "around the time many of the last dinosaur species were becoming extinct" I immediately thought "ah so the rest of the dinos around the world are probably gone and its just these guys left around Mexico"
I got it! Question: does anyone else sit through the explanation even when you get it right?
@legallysaz I do! I sit through the whole thing. Sometimes I put it on 1.5 speed if im getting the concepts but just want to learn what could go wrong
My process so far has been:
Identify the question type
Separate every sentence into premises/conclusions
Reword/Simplify what the passage is saying
Find answer that supports/weakens your summation depending on the question.
I've also noticed that some wrong answers can introduce unnecessary info/ideas/nouns, are just too crazy, or too forward in quantifier verbiage.
Lastly, some correct answers for weaken introduce a new idea/total opposite whereas some strengthen answers do not restate verbatim its premises/conclusions, but are roughly similar/allude to them.
I originally picked c and I understand now that it was already accounted for in the stimulus, but I still have no idea why e is the correct answer. Can someone explain it in a different way? #help
The explanations are good for why E is the right answer.
But, just in case it did not stand out to you. Be on the lookout for modifiers that give you a specific quantifier either in the stimulus or in the answer choices. This really helps me.
I was immediately able to rule out Answer C because it simply says the meteor was responsible for a number of dinosaur fossils. The modifier "a number" is nowhere near strong enough to allow us to reasonably infer that the meteor is responsible for "most" of the dinosaur fossils. "A number" could just as easily mean one or two fossils.
for me, I remembered what J said in previous lessons- to always take the answers in the stem as "being true" and see if it weakens the argument. Of course, if it goes directly against what the stimulus said then its not the right answer but in this case I thought, "ah! Ok I have to take it as true that the dinosaurs lived in the impact area and according to the stimulus- it said they would become extinct only in the impact area so then it has to be true!" hope this might help.
I was between E & C when working through the question. E stuck out to me because it provided direct proof that the conclusion of the stimulus was wrong. The overall argument of the stimulus is that this meteor did not cause a mass extinction event of dinosaurs. The argument is based on a premise that this meteor could not have had a global impact. Assuming E is true, it provides evidence against the argument by saying the meteor did not need to have a global impact since most of the dinosaurs on the planet lived in the immediate area of meteor's impact.
Hope this helps!
Thankyou for breaking this down
That’s a great explanation. Especially because when he goes over why C is bad, he selectively does not discuss “probably” from the stimulus…or maybe I am missing something there .
Probably definitely lowers the bar needed to prove the conclusion of an argument since it factors in some room for error.
But, I actually don't think probably ends up being a major player here in this question. It is good to keep an eye out for though, because it will be an issue in future questions!
All I was saying is that stating that "a number" of dinosaurs clearly died because of the asteroid is not sufficient to prove "most" of the worlds dinosaurs died from the asteroid.
The mystery "number" of fossils we are looking for in Answer choice C has just as much of a chance of being less than half than it does of being more than half. In order for C to have a chance of being right, you have to make an unwarranted assumption that the number is more than half, which is not supported by the stimulus in any way.
i alwayssss fail it the first time and then get it right in BR and im like bruhhhh how did i not catch that before
Why are level 3s easy but level 4s are significantly harder :/
I think the beauty of E is also that it uses the premises against the argument. The argument says that the strike can kill many organisms nearby, but it doesn't impact organisms worldwide beyond that limited range. But if most of the world's dinosaurs live within that limited range (nearby the strike), then yes, the Chicxulub asteroid did cause many of the last dinosaur species to go extinct.