As a very logical thinker, this lesson was very helpful. It defined concessions, points offered in concession, premise(s), context and addressed that not all context is the same. 10/10 lesson
@KhushyMandania As I understand it, concessions are claims made by you that would otherwise hurt your argument if made by the other person, rather than just a single word like "but, however or yet". I like to think of it as acknowledging your flaws or, in this case your argument's flaws before another person can.
@Summy ohh right. I think I confused them. If I recall correctly, "But, however, yet" are indicator words for when we are switching over from the context to the argument.
@Ryo I have been taking notes of what I think is the main point of the lessons/summarizing. I know these foundational lessons eventually should be operating at a subconscious level, and I find note taking to be a useful resource for me when it comes to recall. I think it's all up to the person!
@TanishaVerma Thanks for your reply, I've taken notes on the Powerscore textbooks but not 7sage. It's kind of like a recap so thats why I haven't been taking too much notes.
@Ryo I take notes on the main points - vocab, etc., but I also include the examples as we continue going into the others lessons (expanding more upon them to follow along!) Hope this helps!
@Ryo I have been taking key notes on definitions as well as screenshotting examples/wrong answers to create a board and reference anything that may come up as confusing to reference back at.
Example: Yes, I know the Patriots have gone to the playoffs every year within the past 5 seasons and Tom Brady is an elite quarterback. However, the Patriots don't have a better defense than the Seahawks. Defense wins championships. Therefore, the Patriots will lose to the Seahawks in the championship.
@isabellagirjikianContext/Concession:Yes, I know the Patriots have gone to the playoffs every year within the past 5 seasons and Tom Brady is an elite quarterback. Premise: However, the Patriots don't have a better defense than the Seahawks. Defense wins championships. Conclusion: Therefore, the Patriots will lose to the Seahawks in the championship.
@lemonpie Exactly, it will be a statement that contradicts the conclusion of the author's argument. Another example would be:
"My mom says that I can only have one gaming console. Even though I already have a Playstation 5, I still want to get a gaming PC as well because they're upgradeable, and I can play online with my friends that have PC's."
@EkaterinaUsachev Examining this mechanically, "Even though" sets up the context to be a counter argument to the author's conclusion. Then when you look at the relationship between the claims (the context and the conclusion), there's a weakening relationship.
Concessions cut against and oppose an argument that the author is trying to persuade you of. It's almost like stealing your thunder and framing a counter-argument the way the author wants to. Is this a smaller form of steel-manning?
In the star wars example if he were to expand and add this "and due to the Star Wars movie being very popular there will be plenty of opportunities to see it". Would this still make the "Even though the Star Wars movie is popular" a concession or now is it context for the premise being added?
A concession seems very similar to a counterargument to me. FFrom what I understand, a concession involves acknowledging the validity of an opposing argument, recognizing that it may hold some truth, but ultimately asserting that the original argument remains the stronger option. On the other hand, from my understanding a counterargument i counterargument is a direct refutation, stating that the opposing argument is wrong.
Concession looks very similar with context. Looking back the previous lesson, with the example provided, I don't see much difference. Concession comparing to context would be the oposite point of view of the author? Now, what about if the context in the argument is based on a research that is opposed the author's view? let's consider this Example: "According to the last survey by the Hollywood magazine new Star Wars movie is very popular. However we should watch the documentary since it's a limited theatrical release and the theater in our neighborhood happens to be screening it. Would the first sentence be considered as context instead of concession?
I think it is more so about the indicator words. The words "even though" make it a concession. The sentence you said is more of an explanation, making it context. Correct me if I'm wrong
Is it still a concession if the author then attempts to argue against that specific point? What if the author had followed with "but not all popular movies are good movies?"
I think it is still a concession because the author is at admitting that, at the very least, the movie is popular. While I see your reasoning that this could turn into a premise for the author, it is at least conceding some sort of attribute for the anticipated argument for the not-author. I don't think all concessions need to be non-supportive of the author's claims.
Let's put it this way: in your case, the author is anticipating that the not-author will argue that the movie being discussed is popular. The author essentially goes "Okay, I concede to you that it's a popular movie. However, a movie being popular does not necessitate that it is a good movie. What makes a good movie is x, y, and z, the movie being discussed is absent of these three things, and therefore is not a good movie despite being popular"
The point you brought up, and the mock argument I have put together is the author arguing that being popular isn't necessary or sufficient for a movie to be considered good.
- It’s not necessary because a movie can be good without being popular.
- It’s not sufficient because a movie can be popular without being good.
By conceding popularity, the author uses it to pivot and argue against the anticipated claim (from the not-author) that popularity equates to quality. The concession strengthens the author’s argument that what makes a movie good lies elsewhere (x, y, and z).
The concession serves as a way to agree on a tangential point (popularity) without ceding the central claim about what defines a good movie. The takeaway: "A good movie is not a necessary condition for popularity, and popularity is not a sufficient condition for a movie to be good."
I know I have repeated a bit, but that is to try and make it entirely clear. Hopefully, this makes sense to you. It is still a concession in your case even when the concession is used as a support later on.
How does a concession differ from the context of other people's opinions? It seems like in both, you're presenting the opposition's argument first and then contradicting it with your own. Is concessions "in spite of this argument..." and other people's opinions "contrary to this argument..."?
I assume context can support or deny the authors opinion, or just some background information. Such as "the star wars sequel just released a new movie set 100 years later....". This doesn't support nor weaken the argument in anyway, just gives some additional random information that may or may not be useful to the readers. Whereas a concession in my understanding is like fishing, you give the fish some bait so it bites the hook. You pretend to side with the opposing argument only to flip it around with your conclusion.
While a classic dessert for this holiday is pumpkin pie, I think we should get chocolate cake. Chocolate is much more popular than pumpkin and the cake decor is much prettier.
I reckon it fits the bill; it acknowledges the fact that pumpkin is classic, and we can probably assume that classic is positive and the general go-to for holiday desserts.
Although staying to watch the sunset would require us to spend the entire day at the beach, it can be good for us because it would allow us to skip traffic on the way home.
So an example would be: Although it would require billions of dollars in tax revenue, we should enact universal healthcare since it would allow everyone to receive medical treatment and many other countries already have it.
If anything, these types of sentence structure is similar to that of thesis statements for papers.
e.g. "Despite its well known popularity and effectiveness in treating cancer (concession), chemotherapy can hurt the patient's life expectancy because the induced pain may adversely affect the patient's health by putting too much physical stress on the body."
so an example of concession would be like: I know Harry Potter is not the bets movie in the world but it is fun to watch so I think we should watch it. It diminishes the movie and may turn someone form wanting to watch it but they watch it because it is fun? Does this makes sense?#feedback
Although it would be smart to go to sleep right now instead of studying, if I want a 170+ by September, I may have to relegate some time in the morning to extra sleep to compensate for more studying at night. ;0
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.
63 comments
Even though Panda Express is very good, we should eat at Wendys since its closer by and still has the things we enjoy.
Lmk if this is right
To provide a stronger argument one can say; star wars will be streaming for years while Harambe the Movie has a limited release!
So, a contradiction?
As a very logical thinker, this lesson was very helpful. It defined concessions, points offered in concession, premise(s), context and addressed that not all context is the same. 10/10 lesson
So is "but, however, yet" also a type of concession?
@KhushyMandania As I understand it, concessions are claims made by you that would otherwise hurt your argument if made by the other person, rather than just a single word like "but, however or yet". I like to think of it as acknowledging your flaws or, in this case your argument's flaws before another person can.
@Summy ohh right. I think I confused them. If I recall correctly, "But, however, yet" are indicator words for when we are switching over from the context to the argument.
Do people take notes when doing these? I haven't so far
@Ryo I have been taking notes of what I think is the main point of the lessons/summarizing. I know these foundational lessons eventually should be operating at a subconscious level, and I find note taking to be a useful resource for me when it comes to recall. I think it's all up to the person!
@TanishaVerma Thanks for your reply, I've taken notes on the Powerscore textbooks but not 7sage. It's kind of like a recap so thats why I haven't been taking too much notes.
@Ryo I take notes because I feel it cements info in my head. But we all learn differently too
@Ryo I take notes on the main points - vocab, etc., but I also include the examples as we continue going into the others lessons (expanding more upon them to follow along!) Hope this helps!
@Ryo How much has that helped? I figured 7sage simplifies arguments in a very digestible way. How does powerscore elaborate on a lesson like this?
@Ryo I have been taking key notes on definitions as well as screenshotting examples/wrong answers to create a board and reference anything that may come up as confusing to reference back at.
Example: Yes, I know the Patriots have gone to the playoffs every year within the past 5 seasons and Tom Brady is an elite quarterback. However, the Patriots don't have a better defense than the Seahawks. Defense wins championships. Therefore, the Patriots will lose to the Seahawks in the championship.
@RyanKelly Yup, I would say this is a good example of a concession 😀
@RyanKelly Drake "Drake Maye" Drake
@Jurcis I never expected to see a Drake Maye reference studying for my LSAT. This just confirmed I will score a 180 now. Thanks!
@RyanKelly Are you from the future?
@RyanKelly Could you help break down the example? Premise, conclusion, context, and concession - just to make sure I'm following correctly. Thanks!
@isabellagirjikian Context/Concession: Yes, I know the Patriots have gone to the playoffs every year within the past 5 seasons and Tom Brady is an elite quarterback. Premise: However, the Patriots don't have a better defense than the Seahawks. Defense wins championships. Conclusion: Therefore, the Patriots will lose to the Seahawks in the championship.
so basically if im understanding this , concession points are opposing views of what the author actually thinks?
@lemonpie Exactly, it will be a statement that contradicts the conclusion of the author's argument. Another example would be:
"My mom says that I can only have one gaming console. Even though I already have a Playstation 5, I still want to get a gaming PC as well because they're upgradeable, and I can play online with my friends that have PC's."
@JamesHague Just to make sure this is correct in your example?
Premise 1: Because they're upgradeable
Premise 2: I can play online with my friends that have PC's
Conclusion: I still want to get a gaming PC
Context: My mom says that I can only have one gaming console
Concession: Even though I already have a Playstation 5
will lsat questions use either context or concessions in their argument? or will some questions have both?
@ReaganPressley they could have both, but I would assume that usually they'll have one or the other, but there is no guarantees.
I dont understand why that would be a weak argument. can someone explain?
@EkaterinaUsachev Examining this mechanically, "Even though" sets up the context to be a counter argument to the author's conclusion. Then when you look at the relationship between the claims (the context and the conclusion), there's a weakening relationship.
Concessions cut against and oppose an argument that the author is trying to persuade you of. It's almost like stealing your thunder and framing a counter-argument the way the author wants to. Is this a smaller form of steel-manning?
In the star wars example if he were to expand and add this "and due to the Star Wars movie being very popular there will be plenty of opportunities to see it". Would this still make the "Even though the Star Wars movie is popular" a concession or now is it context for the premise being added?
A concession seems very similar to a counterargument to me. FFrom what I understand, a concession involves acknowledging the validity of an opposing argument, recognizing that it may hold some truth, but ultimately asserting that the original argument remains the stronger option. On the other hand, from my understanding a counterargument i counterargument is a direct refutation, stating that the opposing argument is wrong.
yupppp
Concession looks very similar with context. Looking back the previous lesson, with the example provided, I don't see much difference. Concession comparing to context would be the oposite point of view of the author? Now, what about if the context in the argument is based on a research that is opposed the author's view? let's consider this Example: "According to the last survey by the Hollywood magazine new Star Wars movie is very popular. However we should watch the documentary since it's a limited theatrical release and the theater in our neighborhood happens to be screening it. Would the first sentence be considered as context instead of concession?
I think it is more so about the indicator words. The words "even though" make it a concession. The sentence you said is more of an explanation, making it context. Correct me if I'm wrong
Is it still a concession if the author then attempts to argue against that specific point? What if the author had followed with "but not all popular movies are good movies?"
I think it is still a concession because the author is at admitting that, at the very least, the movie is popular. While I see your reasoning that this could turn into a premise for the author, it is at least conceding some sort of attribute for the anticipated argument for the not-author. I don't think all concessions need to be non-supportive of the author's claims.
Let's put it this way: in your case, the author is anticipating that the not-author will argue that the movie being discussed is popular. The author essentially goes "Okay, I concede to you that it's a popular movie. However, a movie being popular does not necessitate that it is a good movie. What makes a good movie is x, y, and z, the movie being discussed is absent of these three things, and therefore is not a good movie despite being popular"
The point you brought up, and the mock argument I have put together is the author arguing that being popular isn't necessary or sufficient for a movie to be considered good.
- It’s not necessary because a movie can be good without being popular.
- It’s not sufficient because a movie can be popular without being good.
By conceding popularity, the author uses it to pivot and argue against the anticipated claim (from the not-author) that popularity equates to quality. The concession strengthens the author’s argument that what makes a movie good lies elsewhere (x, y, and z).
The concession serves as a way to agree on a tangential point (popularity) without ceding the central claim about what defines a good movie. The takeaway: "A good movie is not a necessary condition for popularity, and popularity is not a sufficient condition for a movie to be good."
I know I have repeated a bit, but that is to try and make it entirely clear. Hopefully, this makes sense to you. It is still a concession in your case even when the concession is used as a support later on.
How does a concession differ from the context of other people's opinions? It seems like in both, you're presenting the opposition's argument first and then contradicting it with your own. Is concessions "in spite of this argument..." and other people's opinions "contrary to this argument..."?
I assume context can support or deny the authors opinion, or just some background information. Such as "the star wars sequel just released a new movie set 100 years later....". This doesn't support nor weaken the argument in anyway, just gives some additional random information that may or may not be useful to the readers. Whereas a concession in my understanding is like fishing, you give the fish some bait so it bites the hook. You pretend to side with the opposing argument only to flip it around with your conclusion.
Does this work?
While a classic dessert for this holiday is pumpkin pie, I think we should get chocolate cake. Chocolate is much more popular than pumpkin and the cake decor is much prettier.
I reckon it fits the bill; it acknowledges the fact that pumpkin is classic, and we can probably assume that classic is positive and the general go-to for holiday desserts.
is this right?
Although staying to watch the sunset would require us to spend the entire day at the beach, it can be good for us because it would allow us to skip traffic on the way home.
yes!
Lets see if I get this right lolll
Premise: Skip traffic on the way home.
Conclusion: It can be good for us (staying to watch the sunset at the beach)
Context/Conession: Although it would require us to spend the entire day at the beach (bummerrrrr)
So an example would be: Although it would require billions of dollars in tax revenue, we should enact universal healthcare since it would allow everyone to receive medical treatment and many other countries already have it.
WHAT? new star wars widely acclaimed?
so concessions could be thought of as counter-arguments?
Yeah, that's what I'm thinking too.
If anything, these types of sentence structure is similar to that of thesis statements for papers.
e.g. "Despite its well known popularity and effectiveness in treating cancer (concession), chemotherapy can hurt the patient's life expectancy because the induced pain may adversely affect the patient's health by putting too much physical stress on the body."
Just think of B-Rabbit.
Imagine after the concession the lsat author just hits us with a "but I know something about you 😈"
so an example of concession would be like: I know Harry Potter is not the bets movie in the world but it is fun to watch so I think we should watch it. It diminishes the movie and may turn someone form wanting to watch it but they watch it because it is fun? Does this makes sense?#feedback
Although it would be smart to go to sleep right now instead of studying, if I want a 170+ by September, I may have to relegate some time in the morning to extra sleep to compensate for more studying at night. ;0
Concession example: "Although it makes sense to study the LSAT months in advance, I am going to just wing it because that is a lot of work"
YOUR EXAMPLE >>>>>>>>
lollllll