I'm confused. B appeared to be refrancing the "however" statement. The excerpt definetely did not sound like it was offering and alternative to support a practice the argument was claiming.
That sounds a lot more like the "however" statement.
@CMas I can try to offer some insight. For the opening of the passage saving money is a factual statement in this passage. They are saying and agree yes this would be the outcome if this were to happen but only in reference to the mandatory practice. The preferred practice is the voluntary one which is current, but the alternative is the mandatory practice. So this is support for the alternative (non voluntary) practice.
tbh I eliminated B after "it is a fact". If something is a hypothetical situation, how is that situation considered a fact? did this throw anyone else off or just me?
It is a fact granted by the editorial - remember this argument is written by the editorial, therefore we should take it to be true since it's HER fact not a GENERAL fact. That's my thinking, hope it makes sense :)
I think it means it is a fact that would be triggered "if" hypothetical condition was met. The editorial argues that the "if" condition may never be met, but the except is still a fact that the editorial grants is true.
Was it between B and D, because I can try to explain in my own words.
So for starters, I picked B (in 2 minutes), but still BR'd and was stuck between B and D
But the reason when B is correct goes back to the support structure of the stimulus (remember this is what we want to focus on - role/way),
B says "It is a fact granted by the editorial that lends some support to an alternative to the practice that the editorial defends as perferable."
D says " It is a premise that the editorial's argument relies on in reaching its conclusion."
Now, let's take the stimulus piece by piece, " The town would not need to spend as much as it does on removing trash IF all town residents sorted their household garbage."
So, this is an if -> then statement (conditional),
If TR sorted household garbage -> Town /spend as much removing trash
Cool, so we note this relationship that the editorial gives us, on lets look to the next part.
"However, while telling residents that they must sort their garbage would get some of them to do so, many would resent the order and refuse to comply."
Basically, in short sure if you tell some people to do something, they will do it, but many will not do it and refuse. In this case, some residents will sort their garbage, many won't sort their garbage.
Now, this is certainly a change from what we first read, there's a structure that is forming from what we first were given to now, the second claim.
The first is supporting the second claim, as it details the relationship of if residents are ordered to sort their household garbage, then the town won't need to spend as much in removing garbage, but the second fuels us more in that the editorial inserts something else, oh actually yeah some may sort but the majority will not.
Note, the HOWEVER (that's a signal change into argument).
So, we are reaching a change in this idea of a hypothetical, that telling people to do something means lower idea of spending (hence why we are looking at a cost-benefit analysis in this case).
"The current voluntary system, then, is to be preferred, because it costs about as much as a nonvoluntary system would and it does not engender nearly as much resentment."
So, this claim contains both the conclusion of the argument (The current voluntary system, then is to be preferred) and another premise (it costs about as much as a nonvoluntary system would and it does not engender nearly as much
Note, the BECAUSE (a signal into a premise).
This entire stimulus moves to the conclusion that the current voluntary system is preferable over the nonvoluntary one.
Great, now how does this relate the rest of the stimulus, it's the editorial basically stating that between the current voluntary system and the nonvoluntary system, the first is preferable for all these reasons listed.
Now let's go back to B and D.
Let's analyze D first, recall it's saying that the claim " The town would not need to spend as much as it does on removing trash IF all town residents sorted their household garbage."
Okay, but if we take D as the correct answer, we are basically saying that this conditional relationship supports why the current voluntary system is preferable.
But how can that be when this claim gives support to the following one after it, acknowledging that some will follow while many will not? And if many do not follow, then how can lesser spending even be achieved by this proposed nonvoluntary system? Makes a huge bump in giving support no?
Note, recall that the lesser spending comes from the condtional that if residents sorted their own garbage then the town would not need to spend as much.
This claim isn't a premise made to bring us to the conclusion, but rather fuel the reasoning for the current system, thus... this claim has to be something else than a premise.
Now, Lets look at B, recall it's saying "It is a fact granted by the editorial that lends some support to an alternative to the practice that the editorial defends as preferable."
So, there's referentials in this answer and lets clarify them - IT is a fact (what's a fact? The town would not need... this is the proposed nonvoluntary system).
Okay so lets continue - to the practice that the editorial defends as preferable (what is the editoral defending? this is the current voluntary system).
Now, with this the answer is saying "the proposed nonvoluntary system claim is a fact by the editorial that lends some support to an alternative (remember - some may, many won't) to the practice (the current voluntary system) that the editorial defends as preferable."
This is just what the stimulus is doing for its role.
Sorry if this is long, and I hope this is somewhat helpful.
Please let me know if anything needs more clarifying :)
These have historically been one of my weakest question types. However, the argument analysis that we have done in previous lessons prepared me pretty well for them now. My suggestion for getting unstuck is just going back through a lot of the past questions in the Core Curriculum to reread the passages, don't bother looking at the answer choices. While reading them, just state what each sentence is doing for the argument. The key here I think is quantity. You have to do a lot of this in order for it to start making sense in your head. It's just an intuition thing that is built up over time, but can totally be built up. Best of luck!
Option B stated "It is a fact granted by the editorial that lends some support to an alternative to the practice that the editorial defends as preferable."
And I read the last clause ("that the editorial defends as preferable") as referring to "an alternative." So I thought "well the editorial does not defend the alternative as preferable" and ruled out B. Did I make a reasonable interpretation, or is that just flat-out wrong?
I think the alternative they are talking about is normal trash collection, so I believe they're saying that normal trash collection is a preferable alternative to sorting trash
I did the same in the beginning, but eventually I read B more carefully and figured it out. I think reading comprehension is super important for questions like this, especially when reading fast
I scheduled myself for the Feb exam :'( so i'm cramming so much info all at once. I'll probably retake in April or June if its not the score I want. To be fair, I am also a pretty bad test taker when it comes to new environments so I will just be thinking about it as an expensive practice test to familiarize myself with the surroundings and procedure for the next "real" exam, just hoping I get a score I wont have to cancel - as idiotic as that sounds
I think you'll do fine. Having confidence in yourself is half the battle on tests like this. Go in knowing you put in a lot more effort than most people do who take this test. You got this
wondering too, I took it in april and got mid 150s, im signed up to take it again in a month hopeing for higher 150s but after the Sa and Na questions im scared ill fall around the same and Im running outta time to apply so nervous
I discarded A a a possible answer because it does not seem like a "fact". The stem refers to the excerpt as a "contention". The excerpt is itself a conditional/hypothetical statement about a future possibility. Additionally, it doesn't event seem like the author grants the conditional. The author grants that some people would sort the garbage and the it would "cost about as much as the involuntary system." So the town is saving money? One of the only questions, I can't seems to get anything useful from. What am I missing? #feedback
It is a premise, but not a premise of the stimulus' main argument. The stim's main arguemnt's premises support the main conclusion that "the current voluntary system is to be preferred". B is a premise for the idea that the town residents should all sort their own garbage.
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.
62 comments
yaya got it right !!! :)
For some reason I thought B over explained I changed my answer damn...
I'm confused. B appeared to be refrancing the "however" statement. The excerpt definetely did not sound like it was offering and alternative to support a practice the argument was claiming.
That sounds a lot more like the "however" statement.
@CMas I can try to offer some insight. For the opening of the passage saving money is a factual statement in this passage. They are saying and agree yes this would be the outcome if this were to happen but only in reference to the mandatory practice. The preferred practice is the voluntary one which is current, but the alternative is the mandatory practice. So this is support for the alternative (non voluntary) practice.
So much easier than NA! WE ARE SO BACK!
These AP questions, really Grind my Gears, ruffle my feathers, bakes my nerves, and changes my light-bulbs.......
I read B as concluding the alternative practice (involuntary system) to be preferable. Need to read slowly...
tbh I eliminated B after "it is a fact". If something is a hypothetical situation, how is that situation considered a fact? did this throw anyone else off or just me?
It is a fact granted by the editorial - remember this argument is written by the editorial, therefore we should take it to be true since it's HER fact not a GENERAL fact. That's my thinking, hope it makes sense :)
I think it means it is a fact that would be triggered "if" hypothetical condition was met. The editorial argues that the "if" condition may never be met, but the except is still a fact that the editorial grants is true.
am i the only one not cooking this concept??? everyone’s like we are so back, baby i’m not back!!! im stuck lol
Where did you get stuck on?
Was it between B and D, because I can try to explain in my own words.
So for starters, I picked B (in 2 minutes), but still BR'd and was stuck between B and D
But the reason when B is correct goes back to the support structure of the stimulus (remember this is what we want to focus on - role/way),
B says "It is a fact granted by the editorial that lends some support to an alternative to the practice that the editorial defends as perferable."
D says " It is a premise that the editorial's argument relies on in reaching its conclusion."
Now, let's take the stimulus piece by piece, " The town would not need to spend as much as it does on removing trash IF all town residents sorted their household garbage."
So, this is an if -> then statement (conditional),
If TR sorted household garbage -> Town /spend as much removing trash
Cool, so we note this relationship that the editorial gives us, on lets look to the next part.
"However, while telling residents that they must sort their garbage would get some of them to do so, many would resent the order and refuse to comply."
Basically, in short sure if you tell some people to do something, they will do it, but many will not do it and refuse. In this case, some residents will sort their garbage, many won't sort their garbage.
Now, this is certainly a change from what we first read, there's a structure that is forming from what we first were given to now, the second claim.
The first is supporting the second claim, as it details the relationship of if residents are ordered to sort their household garbage, then the town won't need to spend as much in removing garbage, but the second fuels us more in that the editorial inserts something else, oh actually yeah some may sort but the majority will not.
Note, the HOWEVER (that's a signal change into argument).
So, we are reaching a change in this idea of a hypothetical, that telling people to do something means lower idea of spending (hence why we are looking at a cost-benefit analysis in this case).
"The current voluntary system, then, is to be preferred, because it costs about as much as a nonvoluntary system would and it does not engender nearly as much resentment."
So, this claim contains both the conclusion of the argument (The current voluntary system, then is to be preferred) and another premise (it costs about as much as a nonvoluntary system would and it does not engender nearly as much
Note, the BECAUSE (a signal into a premise).
This entire stimulus moves to the conclusion that the current voluntary system is preferable over the nonvoluntary one.
Great, now how does this relate the rest of the stimulus, it's the editorial basically stating that between the current voluntary system and the nonvoluntary system, the first is preferable for all these reasons listed.
Now let's go back to B and D.
Let's analyze D first, recall it's saying that the claim " The town would not need to spend as much as it does on removing trash IF all town residents sorted their household garbage."
Okay, but if we take D as the correct answer, we are basically saying that this conditional relationship supports why the current voluntary system is preferable.
But how can that be when this claim gives support to the following one after it, acknowledging that some will follow while many will not? And if many do not follow, then how can lesser spending even be achieved by this proposed nonvoluntary system? Makes a huge bump in giving support no?
Note, recall that the lesser spending comes from the condtional that if residents sorted their own garbage then the town would not need to spend as much.
This claim isn't a premise made to bring us to the conclusion, but rather fuel the reasoning for the current system, thus... this claim has to be something else than a premise.
Now, Lets look at B, recall it's saying "It is a fact granted by the editorial that lends some support to an alternative to the practice that the editorial defends as preferable."
So, there's referentials in this answer and lets clarify them - IT is a fact (what's a fact? The town would not need... this is the proposed nonvoluntary system).
Okay so lets continue - to the practice that the editorial defends as preferable (what is the editoral defending? this is the current voluntary system).
Now, with this the answer is saying "the proposed nonvoluntary system claim is a fact by the editorial that lends some support to an alternative (remember - some may, many won't) to the practice (the current voluntary system) that the editorial defends as preferable."
This is just what the stimulus is doing for its role.
Sorry if this is long, and I hope this is somewhat helpful.
Please let me know if anything needs more clarifying :)
These have historically been one of my weakest question types. However, the argument analysis that we have done in previous lessons prepared me pretty well for them now. My suggestion for getting unstuck is just going back through a lot of the past questions in the Core Curriculum to reread the passages, don't bother looking at the answer choices. While reading them, just state what each sentence is doing for the argument. The key here I think is quantity. You have to do a lot of this in order for it to start making sense in your head. It's just an intuition thing that is built up over time, but can totally be built up. Best of luck!
WE ARE SO BACK
OH YEAHHHH
back like we never left
ARE WE BACK???
SO SO BACK
SO BACK!!
Option B stated "It is a fact granted by the editorial that lends some support to an alternative to the practice that the editorial defends as preferable."
And I read the last clause ("that the editorial defends as preferable") as referring to "an alternative." So I thought "well the editorial does not defend the alternative as preferable" and ruled out B. Did I make a reasonable interpretation, or is that just flat-out wrong?
I think the alternative they are talking about is normal trash collection, so I believe they're saying that normal trash collection is a preferable alternative to sorting trash
I did the same in the beginning, but eventually I read B more carefully and figured it out. I think reading comprehension is super important for questions like this, especially when reading fast
...are we back..?
okay colin, perioddd
just out of curiosity when are you taking the lsat? youre always like 1-2 weeks ahead of me
oh were so back colin
I scheduled myself for the Feb exam :'( so i'm cramming so much info all at once. I'll probably retake in April or June if its not the score I want. To be fair, I am also a pretty bad test taker when it comes to new environments so I will just be thinking about it as an expensive practice test to familiarize myself with the surroundings and procedure for the next "real" exam, just hoping I get a score I wont have to cancel - as idiotic as that sounds
I think you'll do fine. Having confidence in yourself is half the battle on tests like this. Go in knowing you put in a lot more effort than most people do who take this test. You got this
April I hope. Maybe June if I mess up. And you?
Hey! Fairly new to 7sage + love reading your comments on these videos. How did the April test go?
wondering too, I took it in april and got mid 150s, im signed up to take it again in a month hopeing for higher 150s but after the Sa and Na questions im scared ill fall around the same and Im running outta time to apply so nervous
did you take it??
Crushed it. Gonna go out Friday and let the ladies know I conquer 4 star questions on 7Sage.
This comment has me rolling over laughing.
does anyone else have this problem where this question does not have the check mark on the bottom left to check your answers?
Took me almost 3 minutes but i chose the correct answer :-)
UGHHHHHH I was staring at B the whole time but I just thought the language was strong... Turns out that's what this needed 😅
I'm so sad, I originally chose B then thought about it too much and kept flipping between B and D....then ultimately chose D. Ughhhhhhhhh.
I discarded A a a possible answer because it does not seem like a "fact". The stem refers to the excerpt as a "contention". The excerpt is itself a conditional/hypothetical statement about a future possibility. Additionally, it doesn't event seem like the author grants the conditional. The author grants that some people would sort the garbage and the it would "cost about as much as the involuntary system." So the town is saving money? One of the only questions, I can't seems to get anything useful from. What am I missing? #feedback
This question called me illiterate in 6 different ways
If B lends support, wouldn't it be a premise?
It is a premise, but not a premise of the stimulus' main argument. The stim's main arguemnt's premises support the main conclusion that "the current voluntary system is to be preferred". B is a premise for the idea that the town residents should all sort their own garbage.
I know I will regret jinxing this but I think AP questions are gonna be my u know what - (we're only the second you try in and I'm getting cocky)
going from NA to this makes me feel so whimsical
I love these questions <3