what helped me get this one right was use POE and get rid of the two answer choices that don't mention the data, since the truthfulness of the data is in the main conclusion.
@WendellAdom from my understanding it basically goes against the conclusion and is the ideal experiment by using different kinds of soils. But because the conslusion is saying that the data is misleading we need something that is going to strengthen that support on why it is misleading and B answers that by basically saying that they used the molecules equally all in one soil which is not the ideal experiment.
@WendellAdom The conclusion is that the data on the weed killer is misleading (wrong). D would mean the study was well conducted, which would make the data more "correct". So it goes against the conclusion that the data is "wrong".
Ok so for this question I got it wrong the first time and on BR I got it right, so this is how I saw it during BR, the conclusion said that it was misleading, defenitely a section of the argument was already misleading, however, on the other hand the first part was not misleading, so I had to make that misleading for the conclusion to make sense and therefore the argument to be strengthen.,
What got me to get B was that D specifies the conditions in which the killer is applied normally (which we don't know anyway, but it says if true, so...). Still, it doesn't attack the biggest reason for the conclusion. The breakdown.
It is tricky because it talks about the variety of testing situations, but we don't know those, and the premise discusses the variety of soil within context of breakdown of chemicals.
So, B sat stronger to me as it discussed this point.
"B" strengthens the statement if it was referring to "the effects of weed-killer on local soil are probably misleading", but I interpreted it as the effects of weed-killer in general and not the "effectiveness."
In fact, I thought "B" weakens the argument, since it outlines controlled conditions that determine the "effects of the weed-killer" in which one can be more confident with the "effects".
the way i understood this question when answering was this: idk if helpful or entirely correct and applicable for all but here it goes;
The premise mentioned that local spots and their soil conditions have variations in what they prefer. So virtually, if i put 8 apples and 8 bananas in the same spot for the soil to take, locally, soils will pick 8 bananas regardless of the even distribution. Therefore, having equal values and no matter what retaining these biased and varied results doesnt help make a determination, so the data is in my eyes virtually useless and thus misleading, which strengthens and agrees with the argument and the premises involved.
I screamed at the library after this one. That Aha moment when i was between B/E and i realized it was B because (its misleading because it was studied in the wrong environment) made me loose my mind with joy! -- ngl in terms of timing strategy tho this has to be a Later/Never Question not a new/2nd pass
This wasn’t so bad. The conclusion was focusin on data sets between the two. So that for me immediately eliminated all except B and D. I was going to pick D, but then remembered that ideal experiment— which rendered B correct
@JamesJingle basically if we could make the absolute best experiment possible ignoring reality it would be something where we have a massive sample, randomly selected, double blind, randomly sorted into groups, control group, and unbiased.
This question made my balls ache...I got this question right without really understanding what the premise was saying( I hate science topics), so here was my train of thought.
Summary of Stim
-2 molecules in weed killer brand(both mirror images)
-one kills weeds, the other does fuck all
-effectiveness dependent on local soil conditions cuz of molecule concentration in the soil? (what does that even mean), different soil different reaction?
Conc: Data of effects is BS
Thought process behind picking an answer
A) Just repeats second point, bye bye
B) Equally concentrated? Equally likely? But its effectiveness is soil dependent? They ignored the truth of the prem! Gotcha!
C)Has nothing to do with data, pce
D)Literally weakens Conc that the data is BS, go away
E) Literally a word salad, sounds good but doesn't fit into the premise. Its attractive because it states that the Data is BS, but its also wrong because thats the only thing its doing.
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Hold on there, you need to slow down.
We love that you want post in our discussion forum! Just come back in a bit to post again!
Subscribers can learn all the LSAT secrets.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.
131 comments
got it in BR
Got it in BR and I know EXACTLY why I fell for that trap answer 🤦♀️🤦♀️🤦♀️
yayyy got this with 27 seconds left to spare. These WSE questions are hurting my brain lol
i dont know why but these WSE questions take me so much longer than any other question type
I could not get past the very first sentence cause WTF??!?!?!
what helped me get this one right was use POE and get rid of the two answer choices that don't mention the data, since the truthfulness of the data is in the main conclusion.
This question actually made my head hurt
Ive been struggling on the weakening questions, and I am so suprised that I got this one right, got to take the small victories when I get them :)
I did not understand this question at all wow
how does D Weaken?
@WendellAdom from my understanding it basically goes against the conclusion and is the ideal experiment by using different kinds of soils. But because the conslusion is saying that the data is misleading we need something that is going to strengthen that support on why it is misleading and B answers that by basically saying that they used the molecules equally all in one soil which is not the ideal experiment.
@WendellAdom The conclusion is that the data on the weed killer is misleading (wrong). D would mean the study was well conducted, which would make the data more "correct". So it goes against the conclusion that the data is "wrong".
i suck so bad at stregthen and weaken questions.
@KeziaH19 No literally I keep getting down to the last two and choosing the wrong one
Ok so for this question I got it wrong the first time and on BR I got it right, so this is how I saw it during BR, the conclusion said that it was misleading, defenitely a section of the argument was already misleading, however, on the other hand the first part was not misleading, so I had to make that misleading for the conclusion to make sense and therefore the argument to be strengthen.,
@LauraBolivar
What got me to get B was that D specifies the conditions in which the killer is applied normally (which we don't know anyway, but it says if true, so...). Still, it doesn't attack the biggest reason for the conclusion. The breakdown.
It is tricky because it talks about the variety of testing situations, but we don't know those, and the premise discusses the variety of soil within context of breakdown of chemicals.
So, B sat stronger to me as it discussed this point.
"B" strengthens the statement if it was referring to "the effects of weed-killer on local soil are probably misleading", but I interpreted it as the effects of weed-killer in general and not the "effectiveness."
In fact, I thought "B" weakens the argument, since it outlines controlled conditions that determine the "effects of the weed-killer" in which one can be more confident with the "effects".
Good god.
the way i understood this question when answering was this: idk if helpful or entirely correct and applicable for all but here it goes;
The premise mentioned that local spots and their soil conditions have variations in what they prefer. So virtually, if i put 8 apples and 8 bananas in the same spot for the soil to take, locally, soils will pick 8 bananas regardless of the even distribution. Therefore, having equal values and no matter what retaining these biased and varied results doesnt help make a determination, so the data is in my eyes virtually useless and thus misleading, which strengthens and agrees with the argument and the premises involved.
Right when I thought I was starting to improve, the last few questions have been knocking me down! This is so frustrating!
I screamed at the library after this one. That Aha moment when i was between B/E and i realized it was B because (its misleading because it was studied in the wrong environment) made me loose my mind with joy! -- ngl in terms of timing strategy tho this has to be a Later/Never Question not a new/2nd pass
This section is making me not want to pursue law school :)
This wasn’t so bad. The conclusion was focusin on data sets between the two. So that for me immediately eliminated all except B and D. I was going to pick D, but then remembered that ideal experiment— which rendered B correct
@M1ckeymina what was the ideal experiment question you are referencing? I picked D and can't figure out why B is correct.
@JamesJingle basically if we could make the absolute best experiment possible ignoring reality it would be something where we have a massive sample, randomly selected, double blind, randomly sorted into groups, control group, and unbiased.
Yo this question fucking sucked. Shoutout to the guy who said it made him feel like he’s the one smoking killer weed.
Questions like these make me feel like I'm smoking killer weed.
@RyanAlexanderi enjoyed this comment very much Ryan. Thank you
@RyanAlexander everywhere i go man...
@RyanAlexander I felt this one in my soul
gosh I hate science so much :/
This question made my balls ache...I got this question right without really understanding what the premise was saying( I hate science topics), so here was my train of thought.
Summary of Stim
-2 molecules in weed killer brand(both mirror images)
-one kills weeds, the other does fuck all
-effectiveness dependent on local soil conditions cuz of molecule concentration in the soil? (what does that even mean), different soil different reaction?
Conc: Data of effects is BS
Thought process behind picking an answer
A) Just repeats second point, bye bye
B) Equally concentrated? Equally likely? But its effectiveness is soil dependent? They ignored the truth of the prem! Gotcha!
C)Has nothing to do with data, pce
D)Literally weakens Conc that the data is BS, go away
E) Literally a word salad, sounds good but doesn't fit into the premise. Its attractive because it states that the Data is BS, but its also wrong because thats the only thing its doing.
four years of being a chemistry major definitely helped me here though i still took 2 minutes to answer :/
I really need to exorcise the demon in my brain that takes over when i read science questions…