@beneley2k reread the stimulus and just insert the right answer choice after the second sentence. It clicked for me as soon as I did that.
It's hard to understand alone because it's stating an assumption that seems so obvious you wouldn't think you'd have to add it but if you read it in that order it'll click.
This section is on the harder side of concepts we've learned but I'm trying to be so positive about all the little (and big) wins--when those happen. Right now, I'm stoked that I really understood the power of "unlikely" in this drill during my analysis and the role it plays in figuring it out. Double guessed myself and picked D first, but it's so great to know that my brain is ACTUALLY getting it. Now, I just need to trust my gut.
I only guessed B because it connected a premise to the conclusion but I really didn't understand what was being asked, really difficult question but after doing so many, have some of the patterns recognized where I can more or less see what the answer choice should look like
Tried hard to trust intuition and move a little faster on this one. B felt correct as soon as I read it, but I kept going and got tricked into D. For some reason B started to feel like it was mixing up conditions. As soon as I got to BR, I realized this is not hard conditional reasoning because of the "likely" aspect, so B is very clearly correct. Need to remember to soften on conditionals when the stim is written in this way.
I am not understanding how to determine how to write the premises correctly. Why can it not be that inclination to morally judge decreases -> as knowledge of history increases. Am I missing something? Is "as" what would be considered a group 1 indicator.
How would you know to map it in reverse order if you were seeing this question for the first time? I got this question right because the answer linked the two premises that weren't in the conclusion, but I didn't actually understand why that was the missing link. #help
@mariekadent I have a similar problem where I am getting these questions right, but it takes me way too long. How am I going to get it down to 1 minute?
The reason I elimiated C as an answer was because I considered the first sentence to be an exception to the rule that C lays out. It wouldn't logically make sense to have a conditional that stipulates "/understand history -> attribute moral significance" if the first sentence states that it is likely for someone to see hisotry as the working out of moral themes if they held clear and unambiguous beliefs.
I guess the "unlikely" makes the latter claim more ambiguous and not conditional or formal logic, but is that line of reasoning valid? If it's not unlikely for someone to see history as the working out of moral themes if they have clear and unambiguous beliefs, is fair to infer that having clear and umambigous beliefs is an exception to the rule that only those who don't understand history attribute moral significance to historical events?
C wouldn't work, I thought, because if someone does understand history AND holds clear and unambiguous moral beliefs, then it would not be unlikely for them to attribute moral significance to historical events.
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.
192 comments
i got destroyed by this question. but after watching the video, i understand. im so happy i understand. PTL
I'm so lost. This is the first time I've felt like I hit a mental brick wall.
@beneley2k reread the stimulus and just insert the right answer choice after the second sentence. It clicked for me as soon as I did that.
It's hard to understand alone because it's stating an assumption that seems so obvious you wouldn't think you'd have to add it but if you read it in that order it'll click.
took me 3.5 min but i got it right
I love you J. Y.
Someone needs handwriting lessons ASAP!
+4:52 to get the correct answer but a win is a win
This section is on the harder side of concepts we've learned but I'm trying to be so positive about all the little (and big) wins--when those happen. Right now, I'm stoked that I really understood the power of "unlikely" in this drill during my analysis and the role it plays in figuring it out. Double guessed myself and picked D first, but it's so great to know that my brain is ACTUALLY getting it. Now, I just need to trust my gut.
I only guessed B because it connected a premise to the conclusion but I really didn't understand what was being asked, really difficult question but after doing so many, have some of the patterns recognized where I can more or less see what the answer choice should look like
Tried hard to trust intuition and move a little faster on this one. B felt correct as soon as I read it, but I kept going and got tricked into D. For some reason B started to feel like it was mixing up conditions. As soon as I got to BR, I realized this is not hard conditional reasoning because of the "likely" aspect, so B is very clearly correct. Need to remember to soften on conditionals when the stim is written in this way.
took my 6 mins but i did itttt!
hated this question heavy
this section is going to kill me
I was stuck between b and d for so long and at the last min switched my answer from b to d. I keep overthinking and not trusting my gut ugh
@lindsayo did the same thing. who has time to map all of this chaos out too?? fml
I am not understanding how to determine how to write the premises correctly. Why can it not be that inclination to morally judge decreases -> as knowledge of history increases. Am I missing something? Is "as" what would be considered a group 1 indicator.
I genuinely am getting more lost as I go forward each section
How would you know to map it in reverse order if you were seeing this question for the first time? I got this question right because the answer linked the two premises that weren't in the conclusion, but I didn't actually understand why that was the missing link. #help
@angantous I have the same question as well.
omg yay! I got it right, this is the first one after like 8 questions. UGHHH
it took me 10 mins ;/
@mariekadent I have a similar problem where I am getting these questions right, but it takes me way too long. How am I going to get it down to 1 minute?
I got it right but it took soooo long, like how am i going to do that on test day and still be able to complete LR?
The reason I elimiated C as an answer was because I considered the first sentence to be an exception to the rule that C lays out. It wouldn't logically make sense to have a conditional that stipulates "/understand history -> attribute moral significance" if the first sentence states that it is likely for someone to see hisotry as the working out of moral themes if they held clear and unambiguous beliefs.
I guess the "unlikely" makes the latter claim more ambiguous and not conditional or formal logic, but is that line of reasoning valid? If it's not unlikely for someone to see history as the working out of moral themes if they have clear and unambiguous beliefs, is fair to infer that having clear and umambigous beliefs is an exception to the rule that only those who don't understand history attribute moral significance to historical events?
C wouldn't work, I thought, because if someone does understand history AND holds clear and unambiguous moral beliefs, then it would not be unlikely for them to attribute moral significance to historical events.
Let me know!
Only took me 6.5 mins with at least 5 "wtf"s and 1 "idc" to get it right !!
Got it right but took me 3:46!!!
took me 2 days, but i got it. now working on getting it down to 1min30 sec which might take 2 weeks.
No way i can solve/answer this in 1min30sec.
I got this right but it took me 20 minutes 😵💫