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!
Can someone explain the exact difference between this kind of context (setting the table) and just regular premise(s)? I'm having trouble differentiating the two.
Is context usually (or only) in disagreement with the eventual argument the author will make? In both cases described above (but, however, yet and some people say), the author introduced the context and ultimately made an arguement for why it is wrong. If the context agreed with the conclusion, would it be transformed into a premise, as it would be a claim that supported another claim?
I'm struggling a bit with the difference between context and premise. Is it a difference between stating factually and stating opinion/theory? Comparing the management example to the Disney example, I would think the premise in the Disney example in which they tell you the two ways to get a Genie+ pass would be context. The only difference I'm detecting between the Genie+ context and the management context is that the Genie+ is stated as factual, while the "management must be intimidating" is stated as just a theory.
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 ?
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?
#Help - What is the difference between context and a set of facts in a passage with no argument?
0
Topics
PT Questions
Select Preptest
You've discovered a premium feature!
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!
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.
49 comments
Wait, so what is the difference between a premise and context?
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?
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.
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!
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?
Will context only be found in passage? (you will not see this in in the logical arguments part of the LSAT,right?
Can someone explain the exact difference between this kind of context (setting the table) and just regular premise(s)? I'm having trouble differentiating the two.
Is context usually (or only) in disagreement with the eventual argument the author will make? In both cases described above (but, however, yet and some people say), the author introduced the context and ultimately made an arguement for why it is wrong. If the context agreed with the conclusion, would it be transformed into a premise, as it would be a claim that supported another claim?
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."
I'm struggling a bit with the difference between context and premise. Is it a difference between stating factually and stating opinion/theory? Comparing the management example to the Disney example, I would think the premise in the Disney example in which they tell you the two ways to get a Genie+ pass would be context. The only difference I'm detecting between the Genie+ context and the management context is that the Genie+ is stated as factual, while the "management must be intimidating" is stated as just a theory.
What exactly is the main difference between a premise and context? or can they be used interchangeably?
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 ?
In all of our examples, the "setting the table" version of context leads to an argument that refutes it.
Are their examples of arguments that use context to support the argument?
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!
Hmm i never thought about the context and transitions to arguments you learn something new everyday.
Are we always only interested in the argument of the author ?
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?
What is the difference between Background Information and Context?
Thank you!
For arguments in the LSAT, would arguments always be in first person of the author?
Or would there third-person arguments like "some scientists claim X.... But historians claim Y" and focus on the historians point of view?
#help (Added by Admin)
Can context be apart of a premise? #help (Added by admin)
Just wondering, are these arguments about the tigers as pets and how to motivate employees from the LSAT or 7Sage created?
#Help - What is the difference between context and a set of facts in a passage with no argument?