I seriously look at every conversation and argument I have with people through LAWGIC (flaws in people arguments, fallacies, pattern of argument/ structure. The weakness and strength of argument. Short to say my husband is annoyed by me right now LOL
I was so close to picking D, because it is a strong answer. I am so glad that I took a second to re-read the last sentence and thought about what premise is needed to reach that conclusion.
I only ever get SA questions right when I map, but that pushes me over time. Anyone have tips for moving from working it out on paper to doing it mentally? Is it just a matter of doing it enough times on paper that it becomes more intuitive?
@MarieChavis same... they're so weird. As useless as it sounds, the only thing that i do to make them make a bit more sense is to literally just to identify the conclusion and then reread the premises (if i didn't understand it) and then either predict or look for an answer that would make the conclusion valid. i literally ask myself "would this answer make the conclusion valid?" after i read each answer choice. For example, with this question i identified the conclusion and then read the answer choices and asked myself that question. B is right because of the premises. The stim literally says that true meaning can ONLY be understood through insight into the author's social circumstances and the conclusion say thats she doesn't understand the true meaning of her words. Therefore B HAS to be correct. If Smith lacks insight into her own social circumstances (which we are told by the premised that that is the ONLY way to understand true meaning), then B is correct.
@JiyoonLim Yes, I was in the same boat a couple months ago. Keep plugging along and come back to this section a week after review the explanation. It will click.
I still struggle with these types of questions, even when I map it out I can never seem to get it even after watching the video of him explaining it. I feel so defeated after this
@LayalBazzi4 When this happens, it's important to try to boil the argument down to its basic form. Can you tell me your understanding of the argument?
What is the author's conclusion?
What is the core premise of the argument? (There's a lot of stuff besides the conclusion, and we can get more complicated if we want to. But what is the most important claim the author is relying on to prove the conclusion?)j
Forget about diagramming right now. Just see if you can answer those questions.
I feel like im trying to read too deep into the answer choices and dont pick up on whats so straight foward and easy. Like my brain knows the LSAT is evil and doesnt want to believe the answer could be so easy so I try and make a complicated answer work and choose wrong.
@AlexT22 same here. chose the correct answer first but fell victim to overthinking and switched it. only then to go with my original gut feeling and got it correct on BR. frustrating.
Is anyone else confused around the 5 minute mark about JY's notes? Specifically when he mentions taking the contrapositive of social circumstances? I did that myself on my scratch paper while working the problem out, however I wish JY could've thoroughly explained or physically drawn the way that the contrapositive builds the bridge we are looking for. Specifically confused about the /UTMsmith part of the conclusion.
I got this one right initially, however in blind review I changed my answer to D.
I thought D was more right because it directly applied the missing assumption to her theory.
Would D have been correct if it had said Smith's theory about the relation of social circumstances to the understanding of meaning lacks insight (into her own social circumstances).
Was that extra blurb at the end all that was missing?
@DominicCruse The reason it is B is fairly obvious when we think about it. The condition is if we have true meaning then we understand their social circumstances. So the author is stating that Smith does not understand their own true meaning. The condition was already laid out. Without social circumstances we can't have true meaning thus Smith does not have an understanding of her own social circumstances. I treated everything in between as fluff
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!
Sorry, you need a subscription for that.
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.
131 comments
I seriously look at every conversation and argument I have with people through LAWGIC (flaws in people arguments, fallacies, pattern of argument/ structure. The weakness and strength of argument. Short to say my husband is annoyed by me right now LOL
Over a minute but I got it. Great way to end Friday and kick off the weekend.
first question from this question type that I got right and under time hallelujah
I was so close to picking D, because it is a strong answer. I am so glad that I took a second to re-read the last sentence and thought about what premise is needed to reach that conclusion.
I only ever get SA questions right when I map, but that pushes me over time. Anyone have tips for moving from working it out on paper to doing it mentally? Is it just a matter of doing it enough times on paper that it becomes more intuitive?
Lord I can feel my brain STRETCHING to understand this stuff
So....it turns out mapping is actually helpful when doing SA questions.....
understanding 5%
POE : 95%
i almost chose the trap answer but picked the right answer at the last second before submitting it. #word
Studying for the LSAT has allowed me to be extremely obnoxious when arguing with others and I thank you for that.
I am absolutely not getting this question type
@MarieChavis same... they're so weird. As useless as it sounds, the only thing that i do to make them make a bit more sense is to literally just to identify the conclusion and then reread the premises (if i didn't understand it) and then either predict or look for an answer that would make the conclusion valid. i literally ask myself "would this answer make the conclusion valid?" after i read each answer choice. For example, with this question i identified the conclusion and then read the answer choices and asked myself that question. B is right because of the premises. The stim literally says that true meaning can ONLY be understood through insight into the author's social circumstances and the conclusion say thats she doesn't understand the true meaning of her words. Therefore B HAS to be correct. If Smith lacks insight into her own social circumstances (which we are told by the premised that that is the ONLY way to understand true meaning), then B is correct.
I hope that made sense :)
Is it normal to get every SA question wrong on the first try... I hope it will click soon as I review wrong answers thoroughly...
update: it does get better, in baby steps though!
@JiyoonLim Yes, I was in the same boat a couple months ago. Keep plugging along and come back to this section a week after review the explanation. It will click.
Finding the conclusion and trusting your decision on these PSA questions seem to be hitting me kind of hard. It really eats into your time
@Eomerhi yes I waste SO much time reassuring myself
wrote it out like how he does in the videos and man that is effective
I still struggle with these types of questions, even when I map it out I can never seem to get it even after watching the video of him explaining it. I feel so defeated after this
@LayalBazzi4 When this happens, it's important to try to boil the argument down to its basic form. Can you tell me your understanding of the argument?
What is the author's conclusion?
What is the core premise of the argument? (There's a lot of stuff besides the conclusion, and we can get more complicated if we want to. But what is the most important claim the author is relying on to prove the conclusion?)j
Forget about diagramming right now. Just see if you can answer those questions.
Finally! I got one!
If I'm getting it down to a 50/50 most of the time, should I be stoked or terrified?
If you are struggling on this question, please note the conclusion. How it draws back to reality and points to Smith.
bro these PSA are going to be the death of me. I felt so good about studying then hit this question type and im getting everything wrong
@NylaWhite I am in the same boat I think I got 1 question wrong on all the previous ones but now I haven't got an single one of these right
@RyanPrioreschi rip you’ve got this. I just finished the LR core ciriculum and it will get better again
I feel like im trying to read too deep into the answer choices and dont pick up on whats so straight foward and easy. Like my brain knows the LSAT is evil and doesnt want to believe the answer could be so easy so I try and make a complicated answer work and choose wrong.
@AlexT22 same here. chose the correct answer first but fell victim to overthinking and switched it. only then to go with my original gut feeling and got it correct on BR. frustrating.
So hype I got this right
This seems more like a level 4 or 5 difficulty because of its structure.
@nelsonmartins Agreed! I had to reread the passage 4-5 times lol before finally picking the right answer
Is anyone else confused around the 5 minute mark about JY's notes? Specifically when he mentions taking the contrapositive of social circumstances? I did that myself on my scratch paper while working the problem out, however I wish JY could've thoroughly explained or physically drawn the way that the contrapositive builds the bridge we are looking for. Specifically confused about the /UTMsmith part of the conclusion.
@JessicaVerdugoLopez How I did mine was:
Premise:
true meaning of statement -> insight in social circumstances.
Contrapositive:
/insight in social circumstances -> /true meaning of statement.
Conclusion: (Smith)
/true meaning of statement
Conditional is missing sufficient:
? -> /true meaning of statement
From the contrapositive above "/insight in social statement" which is what option B states.
I got this one right initially, however in blind review I changed my answer to D.
I thought D was more right because it directly applied the missing assumption to her theory.
Would D have been correct if it had said Smith's theory about the relation of social circumstances to the understanding of meaning lacks insight (into her own social circumstances).
Was that extra blurb at the end all that was missing?
@DominicCruse The reason it is B is fairly obvious when we think about it. The condition is if we have true meaning then we understand their social circumstances. So the author is stating that Smith does not understand their own true meaning. The condition was already laid out. Without social circumstances we can't have true meaning thus Smith does not have an understanding of her own social circumstances. I treated everything in between as fluff
I got this right but was unable to determine why the other answer choices are wrong