Question about LSAT math, relevant to this question:
If a stimulus makes a comparison about two groups and how there are a given number of A's in B's and concludes that there are MORE of something than the other, can we jump in and question whether the starting amount is the same?
In this question, the conclusion is quantitative. The author concludes that there are MORE of A than B. So, would it be okay to ask myself "do we know if the two groups started with the same amount?"
With the answer being no, would it be okay to jump to AC B that tells us that the two groups started with the same amount?
This question showed me how important 'kicking it up' is.
If you see the conclusion we're talking about etching tools. The first sentence also talks about etching tools. Therefore, we can kick up 'etching tools'. It then becomes a much simpler two set question.
(I also took 4 minutes and didn't realize this till I watched the video so...)
Spent 3 mins trying to map it out with lawgic and then took a step back and looked at it intuitively and got it immediately. Tough to tell when to dive into lawgic or just read it naturally.
@TeklaCo Without lawgic, just thinking it through.
These are the only two types of tools that are used for etching. All of one type is used for engraving. Some of the other is used for engraving. In order for there to be more used for engraving than not, the two types have to exist in the same quantity or the "some" tools have to be fewer in number.
Scan ACs for one of those two options, looking for -
Couldn't there also be the possibility that there are more pin-tipped etching tools than bladed etching tools? That would be a sufficient assumption to guarantee the conclusion.
@Anthony121 That's exactly what I was looking for in the answer choices. I assumed there would be more pin-tipped etching tools than bladed etching tools, for the conclusion to follow logically, which is why I instantly dismissed B :(
These are the only two types of tools that are used for etching. All of one type is used for engraving. Some of the other is used for engraving. In order for there to be more used for engraving than not, the two types have to exist in the same quantity or the "some" tools have to be fewer in number.
Scan ACs for one of those two options, looking for -
my dumbass wrote down that a tool could either be bladed or pin and I still got confused by insisting "what if there is a tool that is something other than blade or pin?
I'm really worried with a 3 hour test fatigue will hurt my ability to do well the deeper into the test I get
i formulated the lawgic the right way and was able to understand what the argument was saying but i have 0 ideas as to why B is right, even after watching and reading.
I have realized that for myself, unless the conditional logic appears in like a super long paragraph where I start getting lost, I do much better if I disregard formatting it into Lawgic. Just reading it like a word problem.
to whoever is feeling discouraged bc of these SA questions, just know that more than half of these highly intellectual individuals on here................are as equally struggling
140 comments
Question about LSAT math, relevant to this question:
If a stimulus makes a comparison about two groups and how there are a given number of A's in B's and concludes that there are MORE of something than the other, can we jump in and question whether the starting amount is the same?
In this question, the conclusion is quantitative. The author concludes that there are MORE of A than B. So, would it be okay to ask myself "do we know if the two groups started with the same amount?"
With the answer being no, would it be okay to jump to AC B that tells us that the two groups started with the same amount?
fuck this shit, I'm out. these types of videos should take mainly 3-5 minutes, not 8-17 minutes.
FINALLY GOT ONE RIGHT ON BR YES GAWD
@CRC YAYAYAYA
I started this lesson off so strong and now I am lost
This question showed me how important 'kicking it up' is.
If you see the conclusion we're talking about etching tools. The first sentence also talks about etching tools. Therefore, we can kick up 'etching tools'. It then becomes a much simpler two set question.
(I also took 4 minutes and didn't realize this till I watched the video so...)
the way ive had this question before and yet I got it wrong again lmfao
I think I rly understand now tho I hope
Spent 3 mins trying to map it out with lawgic and then took a step back and looked at it intuitively and got it immediately. Tough to tell when to dive into lawgic or just read it naturally.
Note: When making visual representations, make sure to keep track of which decisions were arbitrary!
how do you choose when to draw out the stimulus and when not to.
I dont understand
@TeklaCo Without lawgic, just thinking it through.
These are the only two types of tools that are used for etching. All of one type is used for engraving. Some of the other is used for engraving. In order for there to be more used for engraving than not, the two types have to exist in the same quantity or the "some" tools have to be fewer in number.
Scan ACs for one of those two options, looking for -
Pin Tipped more than OR equal to Bladed
AC B. Equal to.
I think it's time for bed after that one
would be cool if you did more than like 1 example of these................
I used some/most/all inferences and could only form a valid inference that aligned with option A :(
Couldn't there also be the possibility that there are more pin-tipped etching tools than bladed etching tools? That would be a sufficient assumption to guarantee the conclusion.
@Anthony121 That's exactly what I was looking for in the answer choices. I assumed there would be more pin-tipped etching tools than bladed etching tools, for the conclusion to follow logically, which is why I instantly dismissed B :(
nope. not a chance on that one
confused
@Gabi
All tools --> Bladed or Pinned
some bladed tools --> engrave
some bladed tools --> /engrave
all pinned tools --> engrave
--------------------------------------
tools that engrave > tools /engrave
We know that the word SOME can mean anywhere between a couple of tools to almost half, but definitely not half. I assumed the latter.
5 minutes .. not sure how I'm gonna be able to get my time down
Without lawgic, just thinking it through.
These are the only two types of tools that are used for etching. All of one type is used for engraving. Some of the other is used for engraving. In order for there to be more used for engraving than not, the two types have to exist in the same quantity or the "some" tools have to be fewer in number.
Scan ACs for one of those two options, looking for -
Pin Tipped more than OR equal to Bladed
AC B. Equal to.
@gurbytown I like the way you explained this, this makes more sense then when I drew it out Lawgically :(
my dumbass wrote down that a tool could either be bladed or pin and I still got confused by insisting "what if there is a tool that is something other than blade or pin?
I'm really worried with a 3 hour test fatigue will hurt my ability to do well the deeper into the test I get
i formulated the lawgic the right way and was able to understand what the argument was saying but i have 0 ideas as to why B is right, even after watching and reading.
This one was tough...
Why did I even bother trying to diagram this FML
Took 8 minutes but got it right lmao..... progress
I have realized that for myself, unless the conditional logic appears in like a super long paragraph where I start getting lost, I do much better if I disregard formatting it into Lawgic. Just reading it like a word problem.
to whoever is feeling discouraged bc of these SA questions, just know that more than half of these highly intellectual individuals on here................are as equally struggling