@lilifakava I think we are learning this because LSAT questions will throw a question or a passage with a bunch of information. Most of it might be context to throw us off.
The context is not related to the argument in the way that the premise is connected to the conclusion. To demonstrate this, I could say this: Most people say burgers are better than hotdogs. But, hotdogs taste better than burgers. Therefore, hotdogs are better than burgers because hotdogs taste better. What other people say about hotdogs vs. burgers has nothing to do with my conclusion. It is simply outside information that introduces the topic and sets up my argument. I can make the argument without the context but I can't make the argument without my premise or conclusion. Think of context like adding 0 in a math equation: 1+1=2, and (0)+1+1=2. The result is the same whether the 0 is there or not. Context works the same way in that it helps introduce the topic or make the argument easier to understand, but it does not affect the logical relationship between the premise and the conclusion.
Some people say that candy is good for you. However, candy has high sugar content and causes cavities, both of which are bad for you. Therefore, candy is bad for you.
Looksmaxxers claim mogging is the best way to get girls. But, lawyers ger more girls than moggers. Therefore, getting a 170 on the LSAT is a better way to get girls.
@SwagOD why not both? you're making the assumption that looksmaxxers can't get 170s on the LSAT or that we have to choose one or the other.... i guess that means i'm trying to go for a 170...
Some employees claim you don't need to satisfy all customers. But, customers who are not satisfied tend to never come back. Therefore, unsatisfied customers are bad for business.
@PremK The "Some people say..." indicator introduces other people's arguments as context for the author's own argument, not necessarily for the author to agree or disagree.
@chloeg6676 I am not a tutor, however, I would say no. Context is essentially the introduction to the argument. Unless there was context to a sub conclusion and then context for the next conclusion, I think it would only be in the beginning.
A lot of people will say that Certified Lover Boy is a better album than Donda. However, CLB doesn't have a single song on the same level as the top 7 songs on Donda (Believe What I Say, Come to Life, Off the Grid, 24, Pure Souls, Life of the Party, Pure Souls). Therefore Donda is the better album
@pbahoura obviously nobody of any intelligence. I doubt a single one of them could get above a 150 on the lsat. I bet they don't even know the difference between sufficient and necessary conditions 😂😂😂
@WillaWeinsheimer by no means am I an expert and I am just learning this information, but I think the distinction between the two are.
Premise - is the claim or set of claims that help support the another statement which is the conclusion of an argument.
Context - is the information that allows you to better understand the argument, In either this video or one prior if there is context and you take the context away, then the argument makes no sense.
I hope this helps!
If I am wrong about this please be more than welcome to reach out to explain the reasoning.
This is an outstanding section! I did the practice in Foundations and there were for sure numerous questions I had messed up in that due to thinking the "Some people say..." was the argument not context!
When answering method of reasoning questions would context be considered a premise in the answer choices? If not, can you all provide an example of what an answer choice would refer to context as?
Others think that Spider-Man is dangerous due to his vigilante status. However, Spider-Man’s presence has been beneficial for New York. After all, since his debut, crimes rates has been significantly reduced.
some people say that you don't need regular physical activity to be healthy. But, physical activity is beneficial to both mental health and physical health. Therefore, you need regular physical activity to be healthy.
context: some people say that you don't need regular physical activity to be healthy
premise: physical activity is beneficial to both mental health and physical health
conclusion: you need regular physical activity to be healthy
Most people believe that San Diego has beautiful weather year-round. However, during the months of May and June, one can expect the weather to be gloomy. Therefore, this widespread belief is an exaggeration.
Many people believe that using public transportation saves you money rather than having a car for everyday commute. However, that is not entirely true. If you consider waiting for a bus or sky train, you lose a lot of your time, and time is something that money can not compensate for.
In this example, which one is the premise and which one is the conclusion?:
"Some managers claim that the best way to incentivize employees to work harder is to intimidate them. But, employees who are intimidated cannot concentrate on their work. Therefore, there is probably a better way to incentivize employees to work harder."
I know the first sentence is context, but am unsure which sentence is the conclusion. It is written that "she wants us to believe that employees who are intimidated cannot concentrate on their work" which makes it sound that that is the conclusion. However I feel it makes more sense if "there is probably a better way to incentivize employees to work harder" is the conclusion.
@Nena_lena I think the last line! There is probably a better way to incentivize employees to work harder BECAUSE employees who are intimidated cannot concentrate on their work. If you flip it around- employees who are intimidated cannot concentrate on their work BECAUSE there is probably a better way to incentivize employees to work harder you can see that it doesn't offer support to the argument.
I am still learning and am not an expert but this has been my thought process so far, I'm open to any feedback!!!
@Nena_lena I think the conlusion is the last sentence. "People who are intimidated cannont concentrate on their worl", is supporting the last sentence. If we know initmatidation is not going to make the employee concentrate, then we should try something else.
I don’t know maybe it’s just me , but it takes up time to try and identify the premises along with the conclusion, and now to identify context info . When doing so on prep test it takes forever to finish a complete test. Any suggestions ?
75 comments
Just making sure, is this correct
Premise: Employees who are intimidated cannot concentrate on their work.
Conclusion: Therefore, there is probably a better way to incentivize employees to work harder.
@AyaHamza that was my P/C as well :)
Does anyone else find themselves applying these principles to everything they read now?
"No, that's not an argument."
"Setting the table, that's context."
And my personal favorite, "Nope, that's a sub conclusion."
So basically, context is necessary, but not sufficient right?
@lilifakava I think we are learning this because LSAT questions will throw a question or a passage with a bunch of information. Most of it might be context to throw us off.
The context is not related to the argument in the way that the premise is connected to the conclusion. To demonstrate this, I could say this: Most people say burgers are better than hotdogs. But, hotdogs taste better than burgers. Therefore, hotdogs are better than burgers because hotdogs taste better. What other people say about hotdogs vs. burgers has nothing to do with my conclusion. It is simply outside information that introduces the topic and sets up my argument. I can make the argument without the context but I can't make the argument without my premise or conclusion. Think of context like adding 0 in a math equation: 1+1=2, and (0)+1+1=2. The result is the same whether the 0 is there or not. Context works the same way in that it helps introduce the topic or make the argument easier to understand, but it does not affect the logical relationship between the premise and the conclusion.
Some people say that candy is good for you. However, candy has high sugar content and causes cavities, both of which are bad for you. Therefore, candy is bad for you.
Looksmaxxers claim mogging is the best way to get girls. But, lawyers ger more girls than moggers. Therefore, getting a 170 on the LSAT is a better way to get girls.
@SwagOD why not both? you're making the assumption that looksmaxxers can't get 170s on the LSAT or that we have to choose one or the other.... i guess that means i'm trying to go for a 170...
@yesterdayseeker conclusion doesn't follow from the premises
Some employees claim you don't need to satisfy all customers. But, customers who are not satisfied tend to never come back. Therefore, unsatisfied customers are bad for business.
If the author agrees with the "some people say..." can that be considered a premise?
Context is table setting or "other people say". This is not the author's position that their trying to persuade you of.
It is simply a "set-up" in order to provide crucial background info or for the author to agree or disagree with what other people say.
Is this correct?
@PremK The "Some people say..." indicator introduces other people's arguments as context for the author's own argument, not necessarily for the author to agree or disagree.
Some peope say and table setting are 2 types of contexts. SPS spells out a position. Table setting give background info.
However, but and yet are indicator words to signal the start of an argument that is the author is trying to persuade you of.
Context does not give or receive support from any other part of the argument and can be temporarily discarded for identification.
Context is distinct and separate from the argument but is crucial to your understanding of it.
Will context ever be present after the argument or conclusion?
@chloeg6676 I am not a tutor, however, I would say no. Context is essentially the introduction to the argument. Unless there was context to a sub conclusion and then context for the next conclusion, I think it would only be in the beginning.
Can you put up the charts that were created to help with these in the notes below the video, as you do in the earlier lessons of this section?
they're awesome to have in my notes and refer back to!
A lot of people will say that Certified Lover Boy is a better album than Donda. However, CLB doesn't have a single song on the same level as the top 7 songs on Donda (Believe What I Say, Come to Life, Off the Grid, 24, Pure Souls, Life of the Party, Pure Souls). Therefore Donda is the better album
@pbahoura who tf says CLB is better than Donda
@ChristianSandlin You'd be surprised
@pbahoura obviously nobody of any intelligence. I doubt a single one of them could get above a 150 on the lsat. I bet they don't even know the difference between sufficient and necessary conditions 😂😂😂
"but" "however" and "yet" often indicate a transition from context to argument.
Wait, so what is the difference between a premise and context?
@WillaWeinsheimer by no means am I an expert and I am just learning this information, but I think the distinction between the two are.
Premise - is the claim or set of claims that help support the another statement which is the conclusion of an argument.
Context - is the information that allows you to better understand the argument, In either this video or one prior if there is context and you take the context away, then the argument makes no sense.
I hope this helps!
If I am wrong about this please be more than welcome to reach out to explain the reasoning.
@ChaseHatfield I think you nailed it. "Context = Extra information related and important to but not a part of the argument."
Simply put, a premise is a core part of the argument, but context is not. It is just related and important.
- I am also no expert. Please correct me if I am wrong.
This is an outstanding section! I did the practice in Foundations and there were for sure numerous questions I had messed up in that due to thinking the "Some people say..." was the argument not context!
When answering method of reasoning questions would context be considered a premise in the answer choices? If not, can you all provide an example of what an answer choice would refer to context as?
Others think that Spider-Man is dangerous due to his vigilante status. However, Spider-Man’s presence has been beneficial for New York. After all, since his debut, crimes rates has been significantly reduced.
some people say that you don't need regular physical activity to be healthy. But, physical activity is beneficial to both mental health and physical health. Therefore, you need regular physical activity to be healthy.
context: some people say that you don't need regular physical activity to be healthy
premise: physical activity is beneficial to both mental health and physical health
conclusion: you need regular physical activity to be healthy
Some people say Ironman is difficult to deal with. However if you look up and focus your attacks on him he becomes ineffective
A protein soda after a workout is said to be beneficial, yet, it is bad for your health because of all artificial sweeteners.
Most people believe that San Diego has beautiful weather year-round. However, during the months of May and June, one can expect the weather to be gloomy. Therefore, this widespread belief is an exaggeration.
@funkmasterjnj Define gloomy and I'll send you a pic from Seattle of exaggeration : p
Many people believe that using public transportation saves you money rather than having a car for everyday commute. However, that is not entirely true. If you consider waiting for a bus or sky train, you lose a lot of your time, and time is something that money can not compensate for.
In this example, which one is the premise and which one is the conclusion?:
"Some managers claim that the best way to incentivize employees to work harder is to intimidate them. But, employees who are intimidated cannot concentrate on their work. Therefore, there is probably a better way to incentivize employees to work harder."
I know the first sentence is context, but am unsure which sentence is the conclusion. It is written that "she wants us to believe that employees who are intimidated cannot concentrate on their work" which makes it sound that that is the conclusion. However I feel it makes more sense if "there is probably a better way to incentivize employees to work harder" is the conclusion.
@Nena_lena I think the last line! There is probably a better way to incentivize employees to work harder BECAUSE employees who are intimidated cannot concentrate on their work. If you flip it around- employees who are intimidated cannot concentrate on their work BECAUSE there is probably a better way to incentivize employees to work harder you can see that it doesn't offer support to the argument.
I am still learning and am not an expert but this has been my thought process so far, I'm open to any feedback!!!
@Nena_lena I think the conlusion is the last sentence. "People who are intimidated cannont concentrate on their worl", is supporting the last sentence. If we know initmatidation is not going to make the employee concentrate, then we should try something else.
I don’t know maybe it’s just me , but it takes up time to try and identify the premises along with the conclusion, and now to identify context info . When doing so on prep test it takes forever to finish a complete test. Any suggestions ?
You'll get faster with practice. Understanding the stimulus on this level is absolutely critical to getting into the high 160s and 170s.