I'm really confused on how the "leaving a parking Space example" shows the first type of causal argument? There is no "one-off phenomenon" in that question from my understanding! Please lmk if anyone sees differently! Thanks!
@IsabellaP The "one-off phenomenon" is cars leaving the specific parking lot. Let's say it's located in Washington, DC. Sure, there are multiple cars being studied, but they're all within this one lot. It's not like we're examining lots in DC, New York, Chicago, etc.
The conclusion says that the delays were due to possessiveness, but it doesn't say "only at this one parking lot in DC." Thus, we are hypothesizing that possessiveness causes delays in leaving parking spaces IN GENERAL.
@miladplays #feedback this (examples under each type) needs to be integrated into the lesson!! The links are frustrating as it takes us to new pages and then I have to come back to this lesson each time I'm done reading the example. I don't want to click back/forth.
Premise: Phenomenon A (where A is a correlation, say X is positively correlated with Y)
Conclusion: Hypothesis about X and Y, maybe it's X causes Y or Y causes X
this form is confusing me as wouldn't the conclusion. be inferring causation from correlation? If the premises state a corelation its simply just a correlation NOT CAUSATION, causation infers correlation but correlation does not infer CAUSATION.
Could someone please help to clarify this argument form and provide an example that helps to explain?
You're right that this kind of argument would be flawed. However, this lesson simply points out that this kind of argument does appear on the LSAT. That doesn't mean this form of argument is valid.
Hi! Could you please direct me to the lesson(s) that use this argument form in the stimulus? I tried to connect all the argument forms in this summary page to one of the 7 lessons in this section, but I'm stuck on which one this would be.
Wouldn't the Mild Winter Birds lesson fall under the last causal argument form (causal chains)?
I'm struggling to see how it falls under the causal argument that contains the Conclusion: Hypothesis about X and Y, maybe it's X causes Y or Y causes X
That might make it easier to remember and internalize. I could come up with my own names but I prefer to have the same names for it as my fellow 7Sagers :))
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!
Sorry, you need a subscription for that.
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.
51 comments
I'm really confused on how the "leaving a parking Space example" shows the first type of causal argument? There is no "one-off phenomenon" in that question from my understanding! Please lmk if anyone sees differently! Thanks!
@IsabellaP The "one-off phenomenon" is cars leaving the specific parking lot. Let's say it's located in Washington, DC. Sure, there are multiple cars being studied, but they're all within this one lot. It's not like we're examining lots in DC, New York, Chicago, etc.
The conclusion says that the delays were due to possessiveness, but it doesn't say "only at this one parking lot in DC." Thus, we are hypothesizing that possessiveness causes delays in leaving parking spaces IN GENERAL.
this lesson should be redone
I can’t see half of the screen. It cuts off mid way.
What are some good ways we can use these causal claim tendencies to select the best answers available?
No video?
A lot of people are struggling to connect it back to the lessons. Here’s what I wrote.
#2-3 : lessons 2 &3
#5 : lesson 4
#6: lessons 5-6
@M1ckeymina Thank you! I would've liked if they explained a bit more and given more examples.
More examples needed!!!
where are the videos
what is this ?
[This comment was deleted.]
@generallypreparedforthings same twin
#feedback this summary was not effective. It did not even use the titles of the different kind of arguments we learned!
Hmmm, what about examples for variants 1 and 2? ya know, the ones least elaborated upon
mmmm delicious word salad!
yummy yummy ;P
fr
what did i just read
wat
I read this stuff and my eyes begin to glaze over. It is when I realize I am more intuitive.
Some examples would be very helpful here. #feedback
Basic One-Off Causal Argument
Premise: Phenomenon A (a single occurrence).
Conclusion: Hypothesis X causes A
Ex: Rain caused today’s traffic accident.
Alternative Cause Argument
Premise: Phenomenon A
Premise: Hypothesis X does not cause A
Conclusion: Hypothesis Y causes A
Ex: It’s not the rain that caused the traffic, so maybe it was the construction.
Assumption-Based Prediction Argument
Premise: Phenomenon A
Assumption: X causes A
Conclusion: Some claim or prediction is made based on that assumption.
Ex: If germs cause colds (assumed), then more contact will increase colds.
Correlation-Based Causal Argument
Premise: Phenomenon A (a correlation between X and Y).
Conclusion: Hypothesis about the relationship (e.g., X causes Y or Y causes X)
Ex: People with higher incomes exercise more, so maybe exercise leads to better income.
Experiment-Based Causal Argument
Premise: Information resembling an experiment.
Conclusion: Causal claim based on experimental results.
Ex: In a study, those who took Vitamin C got fewer colds, so Vitamin C likely reduces colds.
Causal Chain Argument
Premise: Chain of causes (A causes B, B cause C, etc.)
Conclusion: Final link in this chain (A causes D).
Ex: Stress causes poor sleep, poor sleep affects focus, poor focus affects work quality, so stress reduces work quality.
thank you so much omg
#feedback THIS is what we want to see!!! not the super jumbled confusing info in the lesson.
Thanks!
deserves more likes
thank you for being a good person and sharing this.
Wow you are amazing for this.
love you
@miladplays I hope you get a 170+ and get into your top choice.
@miladplays Thank you so much.
@miladplays #feedback this (examples under each type) needs to be integrated into the lesson!! The links are frustrating as it takes us to new pages and then I have to come back to this lesson each time I'm done reading the example. I don't want to click back/forth.
Premise: Phenomenon A (where A is a correlation, say X is positively correlated with Y)
Conclusion: Hypothesis about X and Y, maybe it's X causes Y or Y causes X
this form is confusing me as wouldn't the conclusion. be inferring causation from correlation? If the premises state a corelation its simply just a correlation NOT CAUSATION, causation infers correlation but correlation does not infer CAUSATION.
Could someone please help to clarify this argument form and provide an example that helps to explain?
Thank you so much.
#feedback#help
You're right that this kind of argument would be flawed. However, this lesson simply points out that this kind of argument does appear on the LSAT. That doesn't mean this form of argument is valid.
Hi! Could you please direct me to the lesson(s) that use this argument form in the stimulus? I tried to connect all the argument forms in this summary page to one of the 7 lessons in this section, but I'm stuck on which one this would be.
Can someone describe the difference between a conclusion and a hypothesis? Thanks!
Technically, the hypothesis is presented as the conclusion. But a hypothesis (the conclusion) is the explanation for the phenomenon (the premises).
hope this helps!
#feedback I know others have already provided feedback but a quick 2 min video on this would be helpful, thank you!
#feedback
It would be helpful to show which lessons fall under which category !!
Hi there,
Thank you for sharing your feedback! I've passed it along to our team for consideration as we work on refining our content.
If you have any more insights or suggestions in the future, feel free to share. I appreciate your input!
Does anyone have lessons that they know represent these forms? I wanted to ask before combing through .
HEAVEN SENT!
Actually, I answered it. For anyone wondering, the forms go in order of the lessons. Form one: Jocko the Chimp and Leaving a Parking Space
Form one, Variant one: Snoring
Form one, Variant two: Chronic Back Pain
Form two: Mediterranean Diet Health and Mild Winter Birds
Form three: Relaxation Training
Wouldn't the Mild Winter Birds lesson fall under the last causal argument form (causal chains)?
I'm struggling to see how it falls under the causal argument that contains the Conclusion: Hypothesis about X and Y, maybe it's X causes Y or Y causes X
Do these forms have a name? lol
That might make it easier to remember and internalize. I could come up with my own names but I prefer to have the same names for it as my fellow 7Sagers :))
I think it would be super helpful to do callbacks to the lessons and show which question type falls under which category :) #feedback
Hi there,
Thanks for your valuable feedback! I will look into the possibility of incorporating your suggestions into the next iteration of 7Sage.
Let me know if you have any other concerns. I am happy to assist!
Second this!!! Even just linking the appropriate lessons under the practice problem would be super helpful #feedback
I agree! #feedback
any updates?