@jmont9407 I know this was probably a rhetorical question, but I think I might be able to help out! Assumption questions are super difficult because our minds automatically fill in the "gaps" in the author's reasoning. We (or at least I) often do not realize that the author is even making an assumption because we instantly supply the missing information so that the author's claims make sense. So what really sucks is that assumption questions (and I guess every LSAT question in general lol) require a systematic "break down" of every argument that sometimes feels really unnecessary because it goes totally against how we are used to reading an argument.
What has helped me recently is reminding myself that EVERY Lsat stimulus/argument makes an assumption. Now we just need to identify what that assumption is. Your prediction doesn't need to be perfect (and its probably better that its not), it just needs to make an attempt at stopping yourself from automatically supllying the missing logic
Say we are given the following argument (I've been watching/reading too much Twilight):
Premise: Edward smells Bella's scent from across the biology classroom and realizes it is entirely irresistible to him.
Conclusion: Therefore, Edward will refuse to sit next to Bella.
As a twilight fan (please don't judge me), this makes sense. I'm assuming Edward cares about Bella, I'm assuming that he cares about not traumatizing his classmates (by choosing not to suck her blood right there), and that he doesn't have any other way of avoiding the scent of her blood. I even assume that the fact that he is unable to resist it would would cause him to suck her blood in the first place. But if I negated these, my conclusion might suck. If Edward didn't give a shit about Bella, there would be no reason for him to refuse to sit next to her.
Its really a matter of forcing yourself to really break everything down, which can be mentally draining at times. But you got this!!!! I hope this makes sense/was helpful!
it's confusing at times when the correct answer is praised but then its parts are crossed out like it's the wrong answer. From here i get paranoid that I chose the wrong answer even when I didn't.
Can someone confirm that I am on the right track? After reading the stimulus, I concluded that rocks are necessary for Japenese gardens to be in harmony with nature. Is this conclusion similar to why B is the correct answer choice? I chose B, but my process was different(?).
@Nela I think you have the right "necessary" thinking but in this stimulus, we can't conclude that rocks are the only thing that could make this garden harmonious with nature. The stimulus doesn't say a garden needs to have rocks in order for the garden to achieve harmony with nature. Instead, it's imitation that is necessary to achieve harmony. So you have the right finding-what-is-necessary approach, and you know what part of the conclusion you need to prove, but you didn't pick the correct part of the argument
@TrinidadSilva As you read the stimulus understand what you are reading so you can develop the capacity to remember when you go to the answer choices, that way you don't have to keep going back to the stimulus more than you need.
@ThomasMunnia When the word "should" pops up in a conclusion or a premise that is trying to indicate a rule of sorts, it's prescriptive. It's not saying that the conclusion or rule HAS to be this, just that it should. It's a little looser.
Idk if this will help, but I ignored a and c because they felt too strong, and if felt like you could not use the information provided in the stimulus to actually prove that.
So do we approach these questions the same as PSA and SA questions?? I changed my answer from B to C just bc I felt like B was intuitive, but C negated I thought canceled the argument. Not sure how to approach this question.
What are other reasonings an argument can employ?? I was debating between b and c and of course, I choose the wrong one. I go back and see I couldn’t figure out the reasoning of the argument which I think is what didn’t allow e to chose the right answer. #help! If anyone can tell me what the reasonings are, that would be awesome. Either way, I probably have to check out prior lessons and go back to the basics lol
to me this question type feels so intuitive but I can't make the reasoning as to why I think an AC is correct conscious enough to describe consistently. Any tips?
i got this right but i do not understand which premise is the necessary condition. Is it necessary to display harmony to mimic nature, or is it necessary to mimic nature to display harmony?? #help #feedback... I absolutely despise necessary/sufficient condition questions :(
"The design of Japanese gardens should display harmony with nature" is one of the premise.
"Rocks found in nature also vary widely in appearance" is another premise.
The conclusion is "rocks chosen for placement in such gardens should vary widely in appearance".
Necessary condition refers to a conditional relationship (if..., then...), which isn't present here. So there isn't one here. Instead we're looking for a necessary assumption.
The way I see it, answer choice D is incorrect because it strikes the bridge between harmony and nature as an absolute. Ex. "The zen garden your rocks go into must be natural to be harmonious." I think D would have been a better answer choice if the stem stated that "all rocks that go into your garden must be from nature."
B was correct for me because it was more vague but also because it bridges between harmony and resembling nature. For all we know and care, the rocks could be plastic, but as long as they vary in sizes and imitate nature then there is harmony.
76 comments
why are assumptions questions just so hard for me like WHYYYY
@jmont9407 I know this was probably a rhetorical question, but I think I might be able to help out! Assumption questions are super difficult because our minds automatically fill in the "gaps" in the author's reasoning. We (or at least I) often do not realize that the author is even making an assumption because we instantly supply the missing information so that the author's claims make sense. So what really sucks is that assumption questions (and I guess every LSAT question in general lol) require a systematic "break down" of every argument that sometimes feels really unnecessary because it goes totally against how we are used to reading an argument.
What has helped me recently is reminding myself that EVERY Lsat stimulus/argument makes an assumption. Now we just need to identify what that assumption is. Your prediction doesn't need to be perfect (and its probably better that its not), it just needs to make an attempt at stopping yourself from automatically supllying the missing logic
Say we are given the following argument (I've been watching/reading too much Twilight):
As a twilight fan (please don't judge me), this makes sense. I'm assuming Edward cares about Bella, I'm assuming that he cares about not traumatizing his classmates (by choosing not to suck her blood right there), and that he doesn't have any other way of avoiding the scent of her blood. I even assume that the fact that he is unable to resist it would would cause him to suck her blood in the first place. But if I negated these, my conclusion might suck. If Edward didn't give a shit about Bella, there would be no reason for him to refuse to sit next to her.
Its really a matter of forcing yourself to really break everything down, which can be mentally draining at times. But you got this!!!! I hope this makes sense/was helpful!
it's confusing at times when the correct answer is praised but then its parts are crossed out like it's the wrong answer. From here i get paranoid that I chose the wrong answer even when I didn't.
"some of the choices may make your argument almost too right" (or something along those lines)
this was a helpful trick to eliminate A and C for me at least...
Can someone confirm that I am on the right track? After reading the stimulus, I concluded that rocks are necessary for Japenese gardens to be in harmony with nature. Is this conclusion similar to why B is the correct answer choice? I chose B, but my process was different(?).
@Nela I think you have the right "necessary" thinking but in this stimulus, we can't conclude that rocks are the only thing that could make this garden harmonious with nature. The stimulus doesn't say a garden needs to have rocks in order for the garden to achieve harmony with nature. Instead, it's imitation that is necessary to achieve harmony. So you have the right finding-what-is-necessary approach, and you know what part of the conclusion you need to prove, but you didn't pick the correct part of the argument
The over explaining is confusing to me in these videos
Why do my second choice answers always be right, I keep falling for trap answers
@Super_Cookie dis
SCORE but timing is bad over 1 minute. Any tips on being faster? I am using POE but I think going back rereading does hold me back a bit
@TrinidadSilva As you read the stimulus understand what you are reading so you can develop the capacity to remember when you go to the answer choices, that way you don't have to keep going back to the stimulus more than you need.
SA was easy but NA is difficult. I get the answers right but I don't know WHY I'm getting them right. I can't explain it
@madameatt13ke same it just feels like intuition rn but i know when hard ones come i can't rely on intuition ugh
yayay got it right! :)
Getting these NA questions right is my reward for suffering through the SA module
@iriswu84153 HAHAHAHHAHA
@iriswu84153 so real
@iriswu84153 same here :)
@iriswu84153 me too lollllll
What does it mean when the teacher says at 1:05-1:30, specifically the prescriptive rule.
@ThomasMunnia When the word "should" pops up in a conclusion or a premise that is trying to indicate a rule of sorts, it's prescriptive. It's not saying that the conclusion or rule HAS to be this, just that it should. It's a little looser.
SA was easy for me NA is so hard!!!
I am getting them right, but it is hard for me to tell the sufficient vs the necessary assumption right now. I am hoping I get sharper with practice.
Idk if this will help, but I ignored a and c because they felt too strong, and if felt like you could not use the information provided in the stimulus to actually prove that.
Clarification: This is a rule application question?
LOCKED IN!!!!!
So do we approach these questions the same as PSA and SA questions?? I changed my answer from B to C just bc I felt like B was intuitive, but C negated I thought canceled the argument. Not sure how to approach this question.
What are other reasonings an argument can employ?? I was debating between b and c and of course, I choose the wrong one. I go back and see I couldn’t figure out the reasoning of the argument which I think is what didn’t allow e to chose the right answer. #help! If anyone can tell me what the reasonings are, that would be awesome. Either way, I probably have to check out prior lessons and go back to the basics lol
oh wow so this is gonna be one of those sections huh..
I got this right, but I always feel like the explanations in the video are overly complicated. They actually confuse me even more.
@miriamp same
to me this question type feels so intuitive but I can't make the reasoning as to why I think an AC is correct conscious enough to describe consistently. Any tips?
@LowOriginalConnection I feel the same way. I cannot map out my reasoning, but rather I rely on intuition.
i got this right but i do not understand which premise is the necessary condition. Is it necessary to display harmony to mimic nature, or is it necessary to mimic nature to display harmony?? #help #feedback... I absolutely despise necessary/sufficient condition questions :(
@Nickgigs
"The design of Japanese gardens should display harmony with nature" is one of the premise.
"Rocks found in nature also vary widely in appearance" is another premise.
The conclusion is "rocks chosen for placement in such gardens should vary widely in appearance".
Necessary condition refers to a conditional relationship (if..., then...), which isn't present here. So there isn't one here. Instead we're looking for a necessary assumption.
my thoughts (could be wrong)
I don't understand the "Imitation" part. I did not get this from the stimulus which is why I got the question wrong. #feedback
@Isabella!
This is how I understood this question:
The stimulus/conclusion says: rocks for Japanese gardens should vary widely in appearance because rocks in nature also vary widely in appearance.
Paraphrased, it's the same as: a component of Japanese gardens should be similar to, or imitate, nature.
Another premise is that the design Japanese gardens should display harmony with nature.
So what's the missing assumption here? That imitating nature helps to display harmony with nature.
Can someone alternatively explain why B is right and D is wrong?
Thanks!
The way I see it, answer choice D is incorrect because it strikes the bridge between harmony and nature as an absolute. Ex. "The zen garden your rocks go into must be natural to be harmonious." I think D would have been a better answer choice if the stem stated that "all rocks that go into your garden must be from nature."
B was correct for me because it was more vague but also because it bridges between harmony and resembling nature. For all we know and care, the rocks could be plastic, but as long as they vary in sizes and imitate nature then there is harmony.
omg these lessons make me overthink these so much. these should kind of be common sense and now im getting mad.
inner peace