This is on my Study Plan, I might be a bit behind technologically but am I to watch this because it is slightly confusing as I clicked Foundations and seen this was way down in the Modules, so do I watch this or....?
On the Spectrum of Support, I see that "unsupported" is on the far right with the "weak arguments". I thought that the definition of an argument is premise + conclusion (a statement that SUPPORTS another statement and a statement that IS SUPPORTED by another statement). So, how can "unsupported" be an option as an argument?
Relatedly, could you please tell me whether the following is an argument:
"Dalmations have spots. Therefore, my dog must be a Dalmation."
I ask because this seems like an example of an unsupported argument, if such a thing exists. The writer has a clear message ("My dog is a Dalmation"), but the previous statement doesn't really support the conclusion. If we make a ton of unreasonable assumptions (my dog has spots, the only dogs with spots are Dalmatians, etc.), the first statement can be considered a premise but that feels wrong.
@DeliaCanDoIt! I think these are fair questions! No expert, but I think whether or not something is an argument hinges on the aim of an argument - persuasion. Even though, in your Dalmatian argument, the support is weak/non-existent, you're still trying to persuade us that your dog is a Dalmatian. The problem with the argument is that there are a lot of assumptions (are Dalmatians dogs? are there other dogs that have spots? Do all Dalmatians have spots? Does your dog have spots? etc.,). This could be wrong, but based on the lessons so far, this is how I'm seeing it.
@DeliaCanDoIt! I believe that an argument being “unsupported” doesn’t have to mean it has no support, just that the support it does have is very weak, likely relying on unreasonable assumptions. In other words, the information provided isn’t sufficient to draw an inference. The Dalmatian argument is a great example of this - as stated by jenko14, there is still an attempt to persuade here, with a premise and a conclusion. The aim and the definition have been satisfied, so all that’s left is for there to be support. “Dalmatians have spots” is a premise attempting to support the conclusion, and although it doesn’t do a very good job at it, I would still consider your example an argument because it adheres to the fundamental makeup of one, with all three elements present.
Hey fellow LSAT Takers and aspiring Lawyers, I started doing this a little while ago with my laptops split screen feature. It's nothing too advanced or anything like that just the regular Notepad Software on the computer. It really puts everything into perspective so to speak and can be easily copy and pasted as a template. Upgraded Version Below. Three methods to identify premises and conclusions
- Just get to the point (Conclusion) =
- Reason For Believing This Claim. (Why?) (Gives Support or Premise) =
⦁ Indicators =
⦁ Concession =
Definition: A concession is an acknowledgment by the author that the opposing viewpoint has some valid points or merit.
Definition: The author's point, or main point, is the central claim, opinion, or conclusion that the author is trying to prove or advocate for throughout the passage or stimulus.
I don't see anything in here about the complex arguments and how a claim can be both a sub-conclusion/major premise. Might be something to add in a reworked summary video.
This lesson was amazing and simple to understand. Now, can we get this argument summary in a pdf so that we can put it on a poster. Or could 7Sage just sell the posters? I would gladly buy to hang up. Come on 7Sage, let's get this poster idea going. :)
Hi just following up on this question. I want to create a master review sheet but I do not know where to really start. If you could share yours that would very helpful. My email is pendharkar31@gmail.com
It should say "arguments-summary" in the bottom left of the diagram in the video summary, or to the top left of the comment section. If you click it, it'll take you to Miro where you should be able to export it as a PDF if you sign up. I haven't signed up and done that but when I try to export it, that is what it tells me to do.
@pendharkar31 Hello, if anyone create/receive it, I would like to get it too. This is a very useful diagram and want to print it. Here's my email: diegoantoniocuarto@gmail.com
Question regarding the terminology "number of assumptions."
Aside from cases like the "Disney World Argument" where no assumptions were possible, is the theoretical number of assumptions possible for most arguments not infinite? Granted, the number of these which will be considered reasonable is very limited, but could one not create an immense number of unreasonable assumptions which could adversely affect the strength of an argument?
(OR, are relevant assumptions highlighted only because they would play a role in the arguments relative strength?)
For example, if I say "Not all mammals are suited to be good house pets, after all tigers are aggressive and prone to causing physical harm to humans," would one actually have to consider the assumption of "bodily harm is bad and to be avoided" as a necessary assumption of the argument? What about the assumption "Most mammals could not inflict bodily harm on me, because I am strong."
In this case it really comes down to the answer choices on the test. It is good during the logical reasoning section to have an idea of what some assumptions could be because during the necessary or sufficient assumption questions you'll need to have somewhat of an idea of some before going into the answer choices so you have an idea of what to look for. Hope that helps!
Hi! Yes, they are not explicitly provided. Assumptions in an argument are what's "implied" from the stated premise and the conclusion. A strong argument (the one on the far left of the spectrum) contains no assumptions. It is "bulletproof." Anything besides that has at least one assumption that you can try to identify.
It is not that we are thinking or making them up on our own. Rather, we are just thinking to identify what they are; they already exist.
Hi ylola_2000! I have seen a few of your comments on this Arguments modules. I HIGHLY suggest you get the book "The Loophole" by Ellen Cassidy. This book is a fantastic resource that basically teaches you 'the loophole' to logical reasoning- which is ASSUMPTIONS. An assumption is a loophole in an argument, and it will guide you to its weakness, and therefore the correct answer to the question. :)
Hi! I have heard great things about this book and am just wondering what order I should do things in; did you read the book before starting 7sage? and if so, do you think that was helpful? Or would you recommend I read it after completing 7sage to help round out my understanding? Thanks!
Along the support and assumption spectrum, is it strong premises that leave no assumption what creates strong, must be true arguments. Or is the the few or lack of assumptions that make a strong argument? (Are premises or assumption more important to making a strong argument?)
I believe premises (claims that are explicitly stated) make a stronger argument than assumptions (claims that are not stated) since assumptions could be true or false and premises are assumed to be true.
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.
74 comments
This is on my Study Plan, I might be a bit behind technologically but am I to watch this because it is slightly confusing as I clicked Foundations and seen this was way down in the Modules, so do I watch this or....?
This dude spoke too fast on this sumary.
@GGG Agreed. But thankfully there's the MIRO board. I'd be livid if he didn't post it there.
On the Spectrum of Support, I see that "unsupported" is on the far right with the "weak arguments". I thought that the definition of an argument is premise + conclusion (a statement that SUPPORTS another statement and a statement that IS SUPPORTED by another statement). So, how can "unsupported" be an option as an argument?
Relatedly, could you please tell me whether the following is an argument:
"Dalmations have spots. Therefore, my dog must be a Dalmation."
I ask because this seems like an example of an unsupported argument, if such a thing exists. The writer has a clear message ("My dog is a Dalmation"), but the previous statement doesn't really support the conclusion. If we make a ton of unreasonable assumptions (my dog has spots, the only dogs with spots are Dalmatians, etc.), the first statement can be considered a premise but that feels wrong.
@DeliaCanDoIt! I think these are fair questions! No expert, but I think whether or not something is an argument hinges on the aim of an argument - persuasion. Even though, in your Dalmatian argument, the support is weak/non-existent, you're still trying to persuade us that your dog is a Dalmatian. The problem with the argument is that there are a lot of assumptions (are Dalmatians dogs? are there other dogs that have spots? Do all Dalmatians have spots? Does your dog have spots? etc.,). This could be wrong, but based on the lessons so far, this is how I'm seeing it.
@DeliaCanDoIt! I believe that an argument being “unsupported” doesn’t have to mean it has no support, just that the support it does have is very weak, likely relying on unreasonable assumptions. In other words, the information provided isn’t sufficient to draw an inference. The Dalmatian argument is a great example of this - as stated by jenko14, there is still an attempt to persuade here, with a premise and a conclusion. The aim and the definition have been satisfied, so all that’s left is for there to be support. “Dalmatians have spots” is a premise attempting to support the conclusion, and although it doesn’t do a very good job at it, I would still consider your example an argument because it adheres to the fundamental makeup of one, with all three elements present.
Does anybody have a public Quizlet with similar questions below to help study with? The questions below are super helpful! :)
If using Mac you can open the diagram and go: Shift + Command + 3 to screenshot the entire thing and print it out.
@fjnathaniel thank you so much!
- Just get to the point (Conclusion) =
- Reason For Believing This Claim. (Why?) (Gives Support or Premise) =
⦁ Indicators =
⦁ Concession =
Definition: A concession is an acknowledgment by the author that the opposing viewpoint has some valid points or merit.
Definition: The author's point, or main point, is the central claim, opinion, or conclusion that the author is trying to prove or advocate for throughout the passage or stimulus.
this is giving me Khan Academy vibes with the diagrams and I appreciate the visuals with the audio, thank you
quiz i made to help reenforce the material: What is the aim of an argument as described in the diagram?
How is a premise defined in this framework?
How does a conclusion differ from a premise?
What does it mean when one claim supports another claim?
What determines the strength of an argument in relation to assumptions?
What happens to an argument when one of its assumptions is false?
What is a forgotten premise or missing link in an argument?
Which question helps identify a conclusion using the first method shown?
Which question helps identify a premise using the second method shown?
Name three indicators that usually introduce a conclusion.
Name three indicators that usually introduce a premise.
Which indicators can introduce a premise but also contain a conclusion?
How does the word but function in context according to the diagram?
What purpose does a concession serve?
Give 3 indicator of a concession.
@SeedyN Goat
@SeedyN This is G.O.A.T material right here.
@SeedyN You're a genius and whatever law firm, district attorney's office, or legal department hires you in 3 years will be better off for it.
I don't see anything in here about the complex arguments and how a claim can be both a sub-conclusion/major premise. Might be something to add in a reworked summary video.
This lesson was amazing and simple to understand. Now, can we get this argument summary in a pdf so that we can put it on a poster. Or could 7Sage just sell the posters? I would gladly buy to hang up. Come on 7Sage, let's get this poster idea going. :)
@SRay If you want to make a quick poster you could screenshot it and get it printed out as a poster at Walgreens or CVS for prob $20!!!
the diagram is not loading for me :( anyone else having the same issue?
if 7sage made the file below a poster i could hang in my room i'd 100% buy it.
This is perfect. Dissecting the LSAT like this makes it seem easy! (But I know the LSAT IS HARD-first lesson)
This makes my head spin :-/
@AxelEbermann If you want to make a quick poster you could screenshot it and get it printed out as a poster at Walgreens or CVS for prob $20!!!
Has anyone found a way to print? I tried and it just says embedded code?
Use the Snipping Tool app. I was able to print by snipping the diagram
Does anyone know how to save/print a copy of the chart? I'm trying to attach it to my master review sheet!
Hi just following up on this question. I want to create a master review sheet but I do not know where to really start. If you could share yours that would very helpful. My email is pendharkar31@gmail.com
It should say "arguments-summary" in the bottom left of the diagram in the video summary, or to the top left of the comment section. If you click it, it'll take you to Miro where you should be able to export it as a PDF if you sign up. I haven't signed up and done that but when I try to export it, that is what it tells me to do.
Hi Sofia! Just wanted to ask to see if you would be willing to share your master review sheet?
@pendharkar31 Hello, if anyone create/receive it, I would like to get it too. This is a very useful diagram and want to print it. Here's my email: diegoantoniocuarto@gmail.com
@kennylang123 Unfortunately, this does not work as once you create an account Miro requires you to be a creator or editor of the document to export.
This lesson and diagram was incredibly helpful
This is incredibly helpful in breaking down the LSAT formula. I've been looking for someone to explain things like this everywhere. Thank you so much!
Question regarding the terminology "number of assumptions."
Aside from cases like the "Disney World Argument" where no assumptions were possible, is the theoretical number of assumptions possible for most arguments not infinite? Granted, the number of these which will be considered reasonable is very limited, but could one not create an immense number of unreasonable assumptions which could adversely affect the strength of an argument?
(OR, are relevant assumptions highlighted only because they would play a role in the arguments relative strength?)
For example, if I say "Not all mammals are suited to be good house pets, after all tigers are aggressive and prone to causing physical harm to humans," would one actually have to consider the assumption of "bodily harm is bad and to be avoided" as a necessary assumption of the argument? What about the assumption "Most mammals could not inflict bodily harm on me, because I am strong."
In this case it really comes down to the answer choices on the test. It is good during the logical reasoning section to have an idea of what some assumptions could be because during the necessary or sufficient assumption questions you'll need to have somewhat of an idea of some before going into the answer choices so you have an idea of what to look for. Hope that helps!
QUESTION ... im having trouble understanding assumptions. they will never be provided but instead ... we will have to think of them on our own?
Hi! Yes, they are not explicitly provided. Assumptions in an argument are what's "implied" from the stated premise and the conclusion. A strong argument (the one on the far left of the spectrum) contains no assumptions. It is "bulletproof." Anything besides that has at least one assumption that you can try to identify.
It is not that we are thinking or making them up on our own. Rather, we are just thinking to identify what they are; they already exist.
Hi ylola_2000! I have seen a few of your comments on this Arguments modules. I HIGHLY suggest you get the book "The Loophole" by Ellen Cassidy. This book is a fantastic resource that basically teaches you 'the loophole' to logical reasoning- which is ASSUMPTIONS. An assumption is a loophole in an argument, and it will guide you to its weakness, and therefore the correct answer to the question. :)
Thanks so much you're too sweet - I'll look into it!
Hi! I have heard great things about this book and am just wondering what order I should do things in; did you read the book before starting 7sage? and if so, do you think that was helpful? Or would you recommend I read it after completing 7sage to help round out my understanding? Thanks!
I did all my reading before 7sage. The book they recommended is good but I'd also recommend a book on deductive and inductive formal logic.
#feedback
Could we get a pdf version of the Miro board so that we could print it?
Thank you :)
This is such a bad note format
Anyone know how I can download a copy of this board to my iPad?
I think youd have to get the miro app and see if 7sage has a page that lets you download their boards on miro.
i tried but unfortunately i was not able to download, maybe try screenshotting?
nice
Along the support and assumption spectrum, is it strong premises that leave no assumption what creates strong, must be true arguments. Or is the the few or lack of assumptions that make a strong argument? (Are premises or assumption more important to making a strong argument?)
I believe premises (claims that are explicitly stated) make a stronger argument than assumptions (claims that are not stated) since assumptions could be true or false and premises are assumed to be true.