sweet jesus got this right but it took me 4 minutes. I kept getting lost in the stimulus and trying to figure out the logic of the bad answers and forgetting what I was trying to prove ( engraving>/engraving)
A) All tools used for engraving are etching tools as well
Doesnt matter and I already assumed this.
B) There are as many pin-tipped etching tools as there are bladed etching tools.
guarantees the conc. If there are 100 bladed and 100 pin tip, then 100 engraving from pintip and even if just 1 bladed is for engraving then the conclusion follows. 101 engraving 99 /engraving.
I know we haven't gone over flaws in the modules yet, but if you have background knowledge on flaws, I find that it is helpful to read these arguments thinking about what the flaw about the argument could be. What's missing? And if you use the assumption, it would make the argument valid. Idk if that makes sense or is dumb but maybe it helps someone else.
I did bladed -s--> engraving
bladed -s--> /engraving
pin tipped --> engraving
the assumption i had written down was the amount of /engraving bladed is less than bladed + pin tipped combined
I diagrammed it and was so disappointed to get it wrong twice--oh my soul. SO sometimes it helps to just draw and visualize the arguments like JYP is doing here...
The reason for why E is wrong feels weak. The stimulus states that all pin-tipped etching tools are used for engraving, which is not strong enough of a statement for us to infer they are ONLY used for engraving. So far we've been careful to precisely read the stimulus and not make assumptions, but for this question we do?
i dont get why most of the logic that has been taught has to do with very basic formal logic tools, then half the time we use visualizations of sets and stuff to explain the answer instead of just using the logic that we were taught. This makes it very confusing due to the lack of continuity, moreover it makes questions like these, that should be fairly easily, overly complicated since I am trying to turn them into the logical formulas YOU taught us.
guys I couldn't do these for the life of me, then I went and did SA drills on easiest, easy, and medium mode and it makes more sense now. go drill the easy questions then come back
I ended up choosing B as a result of POE and intuition. However, how does B support the conclusion? For this assumption to support the conclusion you would have to assume that the etching tools that are bladed and can engrave and etching tools that are pin-tipped outweigh bladed etching tools that do not engrave. Do we make this assumption because of the quantifier in the stim that says "some"? I'm confused lol.
if I see a question where the answer will hinge upon determining the size of sets relative to one another, should we just stipulate numbers to the sets first to kind of imagine what is going on, or simply be drawn to the answer that helps us to determine the size of the sets in the interest of time? It was very difficult for me to just visualize/fathom an answer that would justify the conclusion on a question like this. It would be faster for me to just check if the conditions of each answer choice trigger the validity of the conclusion. #help
I understand the difference between necessary and sufficient assumptions and why (C) is necessary but not sufficient.
The conclusion of the argument is supposed to follow logically if (B) is assumed. However, how can this be an airtight, valid argument if (C), a necessary assumption, isn't explicitly stated? Isn't there still a gap that needs to be addressed? I can see why (B), in combination with (C), would make the argument valid, but why is (B) alone enough? Is it because (C) is already reasonable interpretation of the stimulus? Why can't an etching tool be pin-tipped on one end and bladed on the other, or have two hinged arms (like a compass for drawing circles)?
Just now realizing the answer doesn't need to be necessary -- it just needs to be sufficient w. these SA questions --- I avoided B bc I was thinking that doesn't need to be the case to make the conclusion true! I think I'd like to go back and do these trial questions over again in a week with this new perspective... hope it helps because I've been in struggle city.
I narrowed down this answer choice to B and D, very quickly but it took time to flush out D and why it was wrong. Here is how I did it because I feel like the video didn't do quite a good job of explaining why D is wrong. (please excuse the errors, I just copied and pasted this from my BR journal section)
First: Drop the assumption that all SA questions need to be mapped because I wasted valuable time trying to map this out instead of strategically thinking through this.
Second: You have to identify that the conclusion is a comparative claim. Moreover, it is a comparative claim about quantity. Yet we don't know the quantity of the pintip group and balded tip group. So I knew that the answer choice would deal with clarifying this gap.
Eliminate A, C, and E because all those answer choices do not deal with clarifying the size of the pintips in comparison to the baldtips.
Third: Look at D in comparison to B. B only talks about one group, leaving pintips a big question mark. Even if this is true,to reach the conclusion the pintip group would have to be larger or just a big as the baldtip group for the fact that the majority of balded etching tools are not used for engraving tools to not matter anymore.
So, the answer is B. (because if this is true, and all of the pin-tips etching tools are used to engrave, the quantities of 'some' for the balded tools are less important. Whatever the number of engraving tools in the sub-group of balded tools, when counted with the pintips, it will always be greater than the non-engraving group.
Further Explanation (just in case for those that like detail)
Try going through each answer choice and asking what will the consequence of this be when interacting with the premises. Will I get the conclusion or not?
We would need B first before the answer choice D matters. Because without B, the pin tool group could very well be only 2 and the bald tip group could be 5. Now the fact that all pin-tips are used for engraving isn't as strong to deliver us to the conclusion. We can reach the opposite version of the conclusion because we can toggle the size arbitrarily. The quantity would have to be the same and only when this is achieved can we continue on and say, Even if this is true.... etc., the premise we have that all pin tips are used for engraving means that even if 'some' only means 1 balded tool is used for engraving, the engraving group will still have more member in the group when comparing the two
I got it right but I still don't understand the question :/
3
Topics
PT Questions
Select Preptest
You've discovered a premium feature!
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!
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.
101 comments
sweet jesus got this right but it took me 4 minutes. I kept getting lost in the stimulus and trying to figure out the logic of the bad answers and forgetting what I was trying to prove ( engraving>/engraving)
A) All tools used for engraving are etching tools as well
Doesnt matter and I already assumed this.
B) There are as many pin-tipped etching tools as there are bladed etching tools.
guarantees the conc. If there are 100 bladed and 100 pin tip, then 100 engraving from pintip and even if just 1 bladed is for engraving then the conclusion follows. 101 engraving 99 /engraving.
I know we haven't gone over flaws in the modules yet, but if you have background knowledge on flaws, I find that it is helpful to read these arguments thinking about what the flaw about the argument could be. What's missing? And if you use the assumption, it would make the argument valid. Idk if that makes sense or is dumb but maybe it helps someone else.
I did bladed -s--> engraving
bladed -s--> /engraving
pin tipped --> engraving
the assumption i had written down was the amount of /engraving bladed is less than bladed + pin tipped combined
I diagrammed it and was so disappointed to get it wrong twice--oh my soul. SO sometimes it helps to just draw and visualize the arguments like JYP is doing here...
The reason for why E is wrong feels weak. The stimulus states that all pin-tipped etching tools are used for engraving, which is not strong enough of a statement for us to infer they are ONLY used for engraving. So far we've been careful to precisely read the stimulus and not make assumptions, but for this question we do?
broke my brain
i dont get why most of the logic that has been taught has to do with very basic formal logic tools, then half the time we use visualizations of sets and stuff to explain the answer instead of just using the logic that we were taught. This makes it very confusing due to the lack of continuity, moreover it makes questions like these, that should be fairly easily, overly complicated since I am trying to turn them into the logical formulas YOU taught us.
guys I couldn't do these for the life of me, then I went and did SA drills on easiest, easy, and medium mode and it makes more sense now. go drill the easy questions then come back
idk why I am just not getting the SA questions. None of the other question types have felt this difficult :/
this lesson's making me feel so stupid
wtf
math in da LSAT fo today
I ended up choosing B as a result of POE and intuition. However, how does B support the conclusion? For this assumption to support the conclusion you would have to assume that the etching tools that are bladed and can engrave and etching tools that are pin-tipped outweigh bladed etching tools that do not engrave. Do we make this assumption because of the quantifier in the stim that says "some"? I'm confused lol.
if I see a question where the answer will hinge upon determining the size of sets relative to one another, should we just stipulate numbers to the sets first to kind of imagine what is going on, or simply be drawn to the answer that helps us to determine the size of the sets in the interest of time? It was very difficult for me to just visualize/fathom an answer that would justify the conclusion on a question like this. It would be faster for me to just check if the conditions of each answer choice trigger the validity of the conclusion. #help
I understand the difference between necessary and sufficient assumptions and why (C) is necessary but not sufficient.
The conclusion of the argument is supposed to follow logically if (B) is assumed. However, how can this be an airtight, valid argument if (C), a necessary assumption, isn't explicitly stated? Isn't there still a gap that needs to be addressed? I can see why (B), in combination with (C), would make the argument valid, but why is (B) alone enough? Is it because (C) is already reasonable interpretation of the stimulus? Why can't an etching tool be pin-tipped on one end and bladed on the other, or have two hinged arms (like a compass for drawing circles)?
Dear lord please only give me one easy sufficient assumption question on my lsat
Just now realizing the answer doesn't need to be necessary -- it just needs to be sufficient w. these SA questions --- I avoided B bc I was thinking that doesn't need to be the case to make the conclusion true! I think I'd like to go back and do these trial questions over again in a week with this new perspective... hope it helps because I've been in struggle city.
sufficient assumption is the worst.
.
I was only able to get a question right of this questions. This is insane.
I struggle with this type of question!
This took me a second but I got it right!
How do we view the target time for these questions in the syllabus? For the questions in the drills the target times are readily available. ~
I narrowed down this answer choice to B and D, very quickly but it took time to flush out D and why it was wrong. Here is how I did it because I feel like the video didn't do quite a good job of explaining why D is wrong. (please excuse the errors, I just copied and pasted this from my BR journal section)
First: Drop the assumption that all SA questions need to be mapped because I wasted valuable time trying to map this out instead of strategically thinking through this.
Second: You have to identify that the conclusion is a comparative claim. Moreover, it is a comparative claim about quantity. Yet we don't know the quantity of the pintip group and balded tip group. So I knew that the answer choice would deal with clarifying this gap.
Eliminate A, C, and E because all those answer choices do not deal with clarifying the size of the pintips in comparison to the baldtips.
Third: Look at D in comparison to B. B only talks about one group, leaving pintips a big question mark. Even if this is true,to reach the conclusion the pintip group would have to be larger or just a big as the baldtip group for the fact that the majority of balded etching tools are not used for engraving tools to not matter anymore.
So, the answer is B. (because if this is true, and all of the pin-tips etching tools are used to engrave, the quantities of 'some' for the balded tools are less important. Whatever the number of engraving tools in the sub-group of balded tools, when counted with the pintips, it will always be greater than the non-engraving group.
Further Explanation (just in case for those that like detail)
Try going through each answer choice and asking what will the consequence of this be when interacting with the premises. Will I get the conclusion or not?
We would need B first before the answer choice D matters. Because without B, the pin tool group could very well be only 2 and the bald tip group could be 5. Now the fact that all pin-tips are used for engraving isn't as strong to deliver us to the conclusion. We can reach the opposite version of the conclusion because we can toggle the size arbitrarily. The quantity would have to be the same and only when this is achieved can we continue on and say, Even if this is true.... etc., the premise we have that all pin tips are used for engraving means that even if 'some' only means 1 balded tool is used for engraving, the engraving group will still have more member in the group when comparing the two
I got it right but I still don't understand the question :/