Love this section. I'm just asking myself, "Okay what is NEEDED to be true if that's the conclusion..." and usually it's just linking the existing premise to the conclusion. What's the assumption here that bridges the gap? That's your answer.
I'm noticing a common thread in these: the conclusion tends to introduce a factor that the premises don't mention, so the answer typically connects this new factor with one from the premises.
Is that something we can rely on, or is it possible for all answers in a question to address them both?
Up until this point I keep switching premise and conclusion in my answer picking and IDK what switched, but I'm finally understanding that even if it feels right if the conclusion is first followed by the premise, then that answer is wrong (obviously taking into account reversed or reframed causation)
I think im FINALLY starting to get these. get the premise. then conclusion then find the answer that finds the commonality between them is what's working for me. I wasn't doing the lawgic before because I didn't think I would be able to identify them right and risk getting the wrong answer but as long as you have the conclusion right thats half the battle and a good start!
@ariarmstrong03 YES! This is exactly what I've been doing since the beginning, and it has done nothing but help me. Then, afterwards, you just have to remember that if you want A --> B, you don't want B --> A.
the fact that you are using AI for help with this is scary... deadass a computer man... it dont think like a human does lmao and certainly not like the lsat writers
you gotta stop asking ai what the answer should be. B is right regardless of what chatgpt says. take this as a sign not to trust ai so much, its good for a lot of things but not logic
My strategy here (which could be wrong) is that I look for what piece of information sticks out the most. Like a sentence that mentions a new phrase or piece of information, and I think to myself, "what in the stimulus reinforces this idea?" In this case, it was the "interpretations" (which of course happens to be part of the conclusion). As soon as I saw that, I knew that my answer would require me to constitute what exactly interpretations of reality are.
This could be dumb luck, but SA/NA questions are my worst, so I hope I'm starting to improve.
You are saying that anything that is an interpretation of reality is ultimately a worldview. So, even if you are presenting unbiased data with no argument, that is a worldview. That would make absolutely no sense.
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.
77 comments
I'm gaining too much confidence in these You Try exercises just to bomb the drill I know it lol.
got it right but I'm 6 seconds overtime and feeling like my brain is going to explode
These are killing me...
got it yay!
Drawing out the connections between the premises really helped me out on this one!
ooooh I need to start going with my instinct, I was going to choose B initially but went with D.
This is one break down of the 2+? = 5 example that I created for myself for these type of questions:
3+?= 6
3(evidence/premise) + ? (the missing assumption, on this case 3 aka the answer we are looking for) = 6 (the conclusion).
the missing information ? is what together with the evidence solves the conclusion.
i think i might be goated....
feel like i'm reading confucius
I understand it now.
The subconscious assumption you have ( the connection between the conclusion and premise) is the answer
Love this section. I'm just asking myself, "Okay what is NEEDED to be true if that's the conclusion..." and usually it's just linking the existing premise to the conclusion. What's the assumption here that bridges the gap? That's your answer.
@SimonArmendariz Same!!
Lmao I read D and said "ha ha you wont get me this time"
@ManjotSingh I know right?
I actually laughed when I saw it beecause I was like, oldest trick in the book? We're better than this.
I'm noticing a common thread in these: the conclusion tends to introduce a factor that the premises don't mention, so the answer typically connects this new factor with one from the premises.
Is that something we can rely on, or is it possible for all answers in a question to address them both?
@sjbutton so the powerscore bibles say this and its been helpful with these questions:
any new element in the conclusion will appear in the correct answer.
elements that are common to the conclusion and at least one or two premises normally do not appear in the correct answer.
elements that appear in the premises but not the conclusion usually appear in the correct answer.
Up until this point I keep switching premise and conclusion in my answer picking and IDK what switched, but I'm finally understanding that even if it feels right if the conclusion is first followed by the premise, then that answer is wrong (obviously taking into account reversed or reframed causation)
this section is really kicking my ass wow
@ariannazuwa798 same 😭
I think im FINALLY starting to get these. get the premise. then conclusion then find the answer that finds the commonality between them is what's working for me. I wasn't doing the lawgic before because I didn't think I would be able to identify them right and risk getting the wrong answer but as long as you have the conclusion right thats half the battle and a good start!
@ariarmstrong03 YES! This is exactly what I've been doing since the beginning, and it has done nothing but help me. Then, afterwards, you just have to remember that if you want A --> B, you don't want B --> A.
both xAI and ChatGPT agree that the answer should be A, not B. I'm just getting trolled at this point
the fact that you are using AI for help with this is scary... deadass a computer man... it dont think like a human does lmao and certainly not like the lsat writers
you gotta stop asking ai what the answer should be. B is right regardless of what chatgpt says. take this as a sign not to trust ai so much, its good for a lot of things but not logic
it's great for logic. the lsat is about 'lawgic'. i'll keep asking it for insight, but it obviously won't change what the lsac says is right. duuuhhhh
who said i am. i wanted to see what they would say about the problem.
red flag is using AI to help you. LOL
@Utu.Shamash would strongly discourage you from relying on AI tools. Train your brain, don't let a machine think for you.
Finally didn't make the backwards bridge mistake 🥲 i feel like a logic adolescent instead of a logic baby now 😎
My strategy here (which could be wrong) is that I look for what piece of information sticks out the most. Like a sentence that mentions a new phrase or piece of information, and I think to myself, "what in the stimulus reinforces this idea?" In this case, it was the "interpretations" (which of course happens to be part of the conclusion). As soon as I saw that, I knew that my answer would require me to constitute what exactly interpretations of reality are.
This could be dumb luck, but SA/NA questions are my worst, so I hope I'm starting to improve.
its finally clicking for me!!
Same here!
My explanation of why D is wrong.
You are saying that anything that is an interpretation of reality is ultimately a worldview. So, even if you are presenting unbiased data with no argument, that is a worldview. That would make absolutely no sense.
For the first time I didn't confuse sufficiency for necessity!!
was not confident in my first choice which was B, I chose D twice out of sheer annoyance
For these I noticed it is important to go with your first answer choice
B seemed too straightforward I picked D... hopefully that will be a learning lesson for me!