What helped me AVOID answer choice B and ultimately get the question right was remembering what "many" really means. Many also means not all! So, when I looked into the stimulus and read that this is not a guaranteed success, I realize that the premise is also saying that not all succeed. So, the correct answer choice can't simply just be restating what is already being said in a premise. Thus, leading me to pick the correct answer choice.
Another way to look at it is by acknowledging that the argument already acknowledges that a marketing campaign is no gurantee of success. Meanwhile, the correct answer shows that, even if a marketing campaign IS a chance of "saving" the product, undergoing said marketing campaign for the new product will bring more overall harm than good.
The manager isn't arguing about benefiting the company, though. He only cares about the current product based on the passage... maybe when he's talking about guaranteeing success, he's talking about the success of the company and not the product right?
You think you are doing good. Start getting a couple of correct back to back. Then BAM! Some bullshit like this one shows up. I went with B because it directly countered the argument. D seemed like I had to do too much in order for it to work.
The argument was marketing campaign is the best shot, even though its likely not to work. Well B makes it seem like it is almost certain not to work Is it repetitive? A bit, but it also weakens the argument further..
This is the biggest issue on this test for me. Questions and answers like this. The next question I will pick the answer closer to the framework of D and get it wrong. The explanation will say some shit along the lines of "Well don't assume and why does this even matter etc.?" Then I will go back to picking answers with B framework and get it wrong. It seems like I will never be able to get them correct.
For me, it was the opposite. B felt like we needed to do too much in order for it to work. B forces you to assume that the marketing campaign will fail, no questions asked. The whole time I was just asking myself "well, what if they do? What if it works?" and B couldn't provide an answer for all those questions.
And it goes even further. B also forces you to believe that the product will fail regardless of whether you create a whole marketing campaign to promote it. It tells you that it doesn't matter what you do, your product will probably fail, just like many new products do.
Which takes me to my third point: B fails to even quantify that range. What doe sit mean by many? Is it most? Some? Half? Less than half? It doesn't give you an answer. What if many refers to less than 10%? Then you have a pretty good chance of making it work.
It also feels like B is just denying the whole argument. Even the conclusion. The author says "maybe we can salvage this" and answer B says "no, you won't". And that's NOT how weakening questions should work.
But, at least to me, answer D works flawlessly. You can't ask youself "what if the marketing campaign works?" because the answer would be "it doesn't really matter that much, since these other marketing campaigns had to be cut down, which means that other products are suffering because of it, and you're still in the same shitty position". On top of that, it doesn't force you to believe anything, it just states a fact: if you do this, these other areas will suffer. Period. You can't do it. There's no arguing. And it doesn't deny any premises or conclusions. It still allows you to believe that these marketing campaigns can strengthen the new product... but it tells you at what cost. So, yes, to me it was perfect.
I was the same as you, considering between B and D. I didn't go with B simply because it used "many," and that is way too ambiguous and open to interpretation to actually weaken this argument the most compared to D. D said that this new campaign would essentially necessitate hurting the company's already existing position.
During timed, I remember crossing out B because "many" is so vague and left open the opportunity some new products do succeed with marketing campaigns, which the stimulus also seemed to echo (stimulus said marketing campaign is "one chance to save the product").
So, I'm confused about what makes a question easy or difficult. I got that immediately and was expecting it to be easy. Yet I totally missed the easy one, like three questions back. Anyone else?
i just got the last question wrong, 1/5 difficulty (i selected the right answer then talked myself out of it) and immediately got this one right 4/5 difficulty. duality baby!!
When you look at your Results section (once you complete blind review), you can hover over the timing category and it will show you the target time for each Q
I eliminated B because it said "many", not "All". I don't really know anything if some products fail whether they're supported or not. Maybe the companies does maybe it doesn't. The fact that others failed but some succeeded doesn't really affect the arguments strength IMO.
Stimulus summary - "My company should create a new campaign because it's a good shot at promoting this failing product in the market. Hopefully this will make it succeed." (Inference - but at what cost? would creating this new campaign harm the company in any way? hint hint)
B says: "Many new products fail whether or not they are supported by marketing campaigns."
-> B does not really weaken this particular argument, it just says in general, many products fail. How many is many though? 5 products can be many, or 500. Remember. MANY DOES NOT EQUAL MOST. Many equals SOME It's a plausible answer choice, but when you compare it to "D", it's clearly weaker (explanation below).
D says: "Undertaking a new marketing campaign would endanger the drug company's overall position by necessitating cutbacks in existing marketing campaigns."
-> This is specific. Remember, we take the statement of all answer choices to be true. "D" is telling us that creating a new campaign would harm the company's position because they would have to cut back on their other campaigns. There's a risk stated here! This lines up with my inference from earlier... Let's explore further:
--> Compared to answer choice B, this choice directly addresses the drug manager's main argument which is about MARKETING not about the PRODUCT. It lines up a clear path that if the manager markets a new campaign, then this would endanger the company's overall position. That's pretty bad... So, safe to say this choice is really weakening THIS argument, not just a general statement about products in general!
Remember, every answer choice is true, follow the truth to the end to see where it takes you! In this case, the truth of answer choice D would harm the entire company's position!_
I was just thinking that, I'm glad I read this response because every once in a while I forget "many does not equal most". I need to reinforce that in my brain. I was between B and D going back and forth and in the back of my mind I was like B would be a great answer choice BUTTTTT "many" was throwing me off about it, I ignored my gut and went with B anyways. TRUST YOUR GUT GUYS lol
I don't think B talks about the new product, it talks about new products in general, which is a super set of drug companies' new products.
Another way to think about it is this: my newest car 20 years old, does that mean that I should listen to advice given about 'new cars'? We have no idea how old newest is to this company. 'Our newest' is relational to us and what we possess; 'new' is relational to all things whether I possess them or not.
The way that I saw it was that B kind of already goes along with the argument since it states there's still a chance to save the product, even though it's not guaranteed to win. So, B says many products fail, whether or not they use the campaign. Which the argument is already taking that into account in their conclusion. Not sure if this is a great explanation, but this is how I thought of it as I was eliminating the answer choices.
@jjjjffff Even if you change "many" to "most" why would that impact the argument? If most marketing campaigns fail, what drawback is there to trying it anyway? B doesn't give us any reason NOT to try to marketing campaign, because there is no cost to simply trying, even if you were likely to fail. D on the other hand reveals that there is indeed a cost to attempting the marketing campaign.
Does anyone else have to refresh the page every time before running the practice questions? It happens on my phone, my laptop, and my ipad. Just wondering if anyone else has this issue!?
I think this one is really weird. D jumped out to me first as a possible answer, but then I changed my mind because I was like "wait why would we care about the other marketing campaigns" -_-
@GnatTaylor This question hit me, especially after doing a level one before it, like total whiplash ended up choosing D just cause it kinda sounded right.
I am feeling fustrated as I am always between the right answer and a wrong answer (usually the most picked wrong answer) and always choose the wrong answer in WSE Questions. In my blind review I will end up picking the correct answer.
@KayceBassman Unfortunately this is exactly how the LSAT writers want us to feel and they purposely make the questions come down to two seemingly similar answer choices. Ellen Cassidy has a decent chapter about answer choices in her book "The Loophole", that you might find helpful! She specifically mentions how to choose between two answers choices.
I am really struggling with these cost benefit analysis questions. I feel like the biggest issue I have is with defining the scope. With the previous question, although the government and industry is mentioned, the scope is basically only concerning the user of the lightbulbs. Yet here it specifically asked about the manager's position, but we have to take into consideration of the whole company's standing, which wasn't really mentioned anywhere. I'm so lost.
129 comments
I'm just a POE boy.
Same!
@sammariscal07533 mm, I could go for a po' boy rn
I'm over every single one of these questions at this point.
What helped me AVOID answer choice B and ultimately get the question right was remembering what "many" really means. Many also means not all! So, when I looked into the stimulus and read that this is not a guaranteed success, I realize that the premise is also saying that not all succeed. So, the correct answer choice can't simply just be restating what is already being said in a premise. Thus, leading me to pick the correct answer choice.
Another way to look at it is by acknowledging that the argument already acknowledges that a marketing campaign is no gurantee of success. Meanwhile, the correct answer shows that, even if a marketing campaign IS a chance of "saving" the product, undergoing said marketing campaign for the new product will bring more overall harm than good.
First 4/5 difficulty question that I got correct yayy!!
Bro how am I getting these level 4+ ones right but not the 1-3 levels right. my overthinking is killing me
@OmarKouidere same
these are just sofucking difficult i feel like imlearning a whole new version of literature and im a native russian speaker or somesht
The manager isn't arguing about benefiting the company, though. He only cares about the current product based on the passage... maybe when he's talking about guaranteeing success, he's talking about the success of the company and not the product right?
@sarahbalfoul That was exactly my thought as well
You think you are doing good. Start getting a couple of correct back to back. Then BAM! Some bullshit like this one shows up. I went with B because it directly countered the argument. D seemed like I had to do too much in order for it to work.
The argument was marketing campaign is the best shot, even though its likely not to work. Well B makes it seem like it is almost certain not to work Is it repetitive? A bit, but it also weakens the argument further..
This is the biggest issue on this test for me. Questions and answers like this. The next question I will pick the answer closer to the framework of D and get it wrong. The explanation will say some shit along the lines of "Well don't assume and why does this even matter etc.?" Then I will go back to picking answers with B framework and get it wrong. It seems like I will never be able to get them correct.
For me, it was the opposite. B felt like we needed to do too much in order for it to work. B forces you to assume that the marketing campaign will fail, no questions asked. The whole time I was just asking myself "well, what if they do? What if it works?" and B couldn't provide an answer for all those questions.
And it goes even further. B also forces you to believe that the product will fail regardless of whether you create a whole marketing campaign to promote it. It tells you that it doesn't matter what you do, your product will probably fail, just like many new products do.
Which takes me to my third point: B fails to even quantify that range. What doe sit mean by many? Is it most? Some? Half? Less than half? It doesn't give you an answer. What if many refers to less than 10%? Then you have a pretty good chance of making it work.
It also feels like B is just denying the whole argument. Even the conclusion. The author says "maybe we can salvage this" and answer B says "no, you won't". And that's NOT how weakening questions should work.
But, at least to me, answer D works flawlessly. You can't ask youself "what if the marketing campaign works?" because the answer would be "it doesn't really matter that much, since these other marketing campaigns had to be cut down, which means that other products are suffering because of it, and you're still in the same shitty position". On top of that, it doesn't force you to believe anything, it just states a fact: if you do this, these other areas will suffer. Period. You can't do it. There's no arguing. And it doesn't deny any premises or conclusions. It still allows you to believe that these marketing campaigns can strengthen the new product... but it tells you at what cost. So, yes, to me it was perfect.
I was the same as you, considering between B and D. I didn't go with B simply because it used "many," and that is way too ambiguous and open to interpretation to actually weaken this argument the most compared to D. D said that this new campaign would essentially necessitate hurting the company's already existing position.
It's funny how i'm getting the harder difficulty ones right but not the easier difficulty ones rip
What's unreasonable is how long it took me to answer this question
it will trust the process!
ikr, difficulty 4/5 and supposed to take 1 min, it's just not happening lol.
i choose b and then debating changing it to d in blind review I did not change it and I waa seriously humbled
i too chose B .. sigh
During timed, I remember crossing out B because "many" is so vague and left open the opportunity some new products do succeed with marketing campaigns, which the stimulus also seemed to echo (stimulus said marketing campaign is "one chance to save the product").
So, I'm confused about what makes a question easy or difficult. I got that immediately and was expecting it to be easy. Yet I totally missed the easy one, like three questions back. Anyone else?
@MarieChavis My guess is many people got this wrong that would explain the difficulty.
i just got the last question wrong, 1/5 difficulty (i selected the right answer then talked myself out of it) and immediately got this one right 4/5 difficulty. duality baby!!
insert get it sexyy dance
SAME!
whenever i see a short stimulus, I always think "this has got to be a four or five star" XD I WAS RIGHTTTT
Does anyone else get all the 4-5 difficulty ones correct and under the target time but struggles on like 1-2 difficulty lol?
yep!
where can i learn about the target time and time skills/advice
When you look at your Results section (once you complete blind review), you can hover over the timing category and it will show you the target time for each Q
POE!!!!
I really dislike these weakening questions, I need to work on them more :/
one thing about B is that it is actually related to the new product; whereas D is about the company......how do we know which is more important?
Not sure if this helps but,
I eliminated B because it said "many", not "All". I don't really know anything if some products fail whether they're supported or not. Maybe the companies does maybe it doesn't. The fact that others failed but some succeeded doesn't really affect the arguments strength IMO.
Stimulus summary - "My company should create a new campaign because it's a good shot at promoting this failing product in the market. Hopefully this will make it succeed." (Inference - but at what cost? would creating this new campaign harm the company in any way? hint hint)
B says: "Many new products fail whether or not they are supported by marketing campaigns."
-> B does not really weaken this particular argument, it just says in general, many products fail. How many is many though? 5 products can be many, or 500. Remember. MANY DOES NOT EQUAL MOST. Many equals SOME It's a plausible answer choice, but when you compare it to "D", it's clearly weaker (explanation below).
D says: "Undertaking a new marketing campaign would endanger the drug company's overall position by necessitating cutbacks in existing marketing campaigns."
-> This is specific. Remember, we take the statement of all answer choices to be true. "D" is telling us that creating a new campaign would harm the company's position because they would have to cut back on their other campaigns. There's a risk stated here! This lines up with my inference from earlier... Let's explore further:
--> Compared to answer choice B, this choice directly addresses the drug manager's main argument which is about MARKETING not about the PRODUCT. It lines up a clear path that if the manager markets a new campaign, then this would endanger the company's overall position. That's pretty bad... So, safe to say this choice is really weakening THIS argument, not just a general statement about products in general!
Remember, every answer choice is true, follow the truth to the end to see where it takes you! In this case, the truth of answer choice D would harm the entire company's position!_
I was just thinking that, I'm glad I read this response because every once in a while I forget "many does not equal most". I need to reinforce that in my brain. I was between B and D going back and forth and in the back of my mind I was like B would be a great answer choice BUTTTTT "many" was throwing me off about it, I ignored my gut and went with B anyways. TRUST YOUR GUT GUYS lol
I don't think B talks about the new product, it talks about new products in general, which is a super set of drug companies' new products.
Another way to think about it is this: my newest car 20 years old, does that mean that I should listen to advice given about 'new cars'? We have no idea how old newest is to this company. 'Our newest' is relational to us and what we possess; 'new' is relational to all things whether I possess them or not.
The way that I saw it was that B kind of already goes along with the argument since it states there's still a chance to save the product, even though it's not guaranteed to win. So, B says many products fail, whether or not they use the campaign. Which the argument is already taking that into account in their conclusion. Not sure if this is a great explanation, but this is how I thought of it as I was eliminating the answer choices.
@jjjjffff Even if you change "many" to "most" why would that impact the argument? If most marketing campaigns fail, what drawback is there to trying it anyway? B doesn't give us any reason NOT to try to marketing campaign, because there is no cost to simply trying, even if you were likely to fail. D on the other hand reveals that there is indeed a cost to attempting the marketing campaign.
Does anyone else have to refresh the page every time before running the practice questions? It happens on my phone, my laptop, and my ipad. Just wondering if anyone else has this issue!?
@LawyeRell Occasionally. I recommend checking if your browser needs an update. This will happen on other sites if chrome or something is out of date.
@DNAlex Gotcha. Thanks!
I picked the right answer at first and second guessed myself on blind review </3
Very weird with these types of questions. A 4-level difficulty question can feel like a 1 and vice versa.
I think this one is really weird. D jumped out to me first as a possible answer, but then I changed my mind because I was like "wait why would we care about the other marketing campaigns" -_-
@GnatTaylor This question hit me, especially after doing a level one before it, like total whiplash ended up choosing D just cause it kinda sounded right.
I seriously don't get how every w/s question is so confusing for me
I am feeling fustrated as I am always between the right answer and a wrong answer (usually the most picked wrong answer) and always choose the wrong answer in WSE Questions. In my blind review I will end up picking the correct answer.
Can someone please help me on how to fix this?
@KayceBassman This happens to me to 99% of the time, and I think we just have to continue practicing.
@KayceBassman Unfortunately this is exactly how the LSAT writers want us to feel and they purposely make the questions come down to two seemingly similar answer choices. Ellen Cassidy has a decent chapter about answer choices in her book "The Loophole", that you might find helpful! She specifically mentions how to choose between two answers choices.
I am really struggling with these cost benefit analysis questions. I feel like the biggest issue I have is with defining the scope. With the previous question, although the government and industry is mentioned, the scope is basically only concerning the user of the lightbulbs. Yet here it specifically asked about the manager's position, but we have to take into consideration of the whole company's standing, which wasn't really mentioned anywhere. I'm so lost.