@AnaColuma "it probably does" is the conclusion. there can only be one conclusion and if a statement lends support, then it is automatically not a conclusion. "Driving position affects both comfort and the ability to see the road clearly," supports the idea that "it probably does (position of a car drivers seat impacts driver safety)"
@AnaColuma I thought the same until I took the claim and the end of the stimulus and asked "why" and then "Because" and vice versa. It didn't make sense that "x" was therefore "y" (Y being A)
I almost saw this as a conclusion. I guess the language sort of made it feel like a sub-conclusion, or a rephrasing of the conclusion. Ultimately, I did choose the correct answer but I'm happy that now I can learn better sentence parsing!
I'm sometimes struggling to see when a premise could or could not be a major premise/sub-conclusion...
Is "Driving position affects both comfort and the ability to see the road clearly" not a major premise/sub-conclusion, despite being the cause & effect in the stim's causal chain?
Also, if there is a sub-conclusion in an argument (and that's the excerpt's role) are there general ways that the answer choices could be phrased?
@e.wimoine My thoughts are that I don't think that this stimulus is multi-layered with major/minor premises and conclusions. The conclusion is pretty direct at the beginning. The sentence that follows, "Driving position affects both comfort and the ability to see the road clearly" is the premise. The last two sentences are just providing a more detailed explanation of that premise, expanding on each of the two topics offered as support to the conclusion ("comfort" and "ability to see the road clearly"). The last two sentences don't necessarily provide any new ideas that would prompt us to try and understand how they are inter-connected. So, I would just see it more as a detailed expansion/explanation of the premise. Would love to hear other thoughts as well!
So what's worked for me with these past few questions is really just reading the stem and stim all the way through. I have a tendency to want to fly though the questions, but especially with these AP Q's I get tripped up with the wording. Super obvious I know, but it has helped.
Can anyone dumb this down for me? How is it not the conclusion? Maybe my brain has been fogged from countless LR but everything after "Driving position affects both comfort and the ability to see the road clearly" is just evidence and facts that support this claim right?
Ex. "The better the visibility from the drivers seat, the more aware the driver can be of road conditions and other vehicles". This just further proves that Driving position affects both comfort and the ability to see the road clearly..
I thought it was the conclusion, too. I scanned though the rest of the stim trying to find a hint of another conclusion but settled on that one. I dont understand either :(
@ReneBarseghian I saw the "It probably does" as the conclusion. I can't really explain why I did it, but it felt intuitive b/c the statement after that felt like evidence, not a conclusion. For me it went like this:
Driving blah blah blah? (establishes argument)
It probably does (conclusion)
Driving position affects blah blah blah (evidence for argument, argument goes on to explain its position)
@ReneBarseghian "It probably does" is the conclusion after the question in the first sentence was posed. You have to remember "it" is referring to something and that something is the question from the first sentence. As such everything after that conclusion is a premise to support the conclusion. It can't be the conclusion because what support does it garner from the other sentences. I hope this helps.
I don't know why but 3 star difficulty questions seem to be my 5 star difficulty questions. I struggle so much with them and then 5 star questions seem less intense somehow
I chose E but struggled with C for 10 or so seconds, because I didn't scrutinize C beyond the "causal mechanism" part. It seems that the answer choices often refer to other sentences in the passage, I need to make sure to identify whether those track correctly as well.
So if the excerpt was an observation, C would have been correct? But you also mention the excerpt is a rhetorical question, which is a declarative statement/observation, so I still don't see why this wouldn't also be considered a causal mechanism for an observed phenomenon.
i dont understand why we cant just look at the statement and decide if its a premise or a conclusion or something else. Like why do we have to translate everything into how the logic works?
honestly if that works for you and you're doing well then don't worry as much about the logic. I agree, I've been getting super confused with the logic part. I'll get the answer correct, but then when I listen to the logic explanation I get lost. Definitely do what's best for you!!
Is it an intermediate conclusion? It seems like the two sentences following the argument part in question support that argument part, making the two sentences premises that support the intermediate conclusion that supports the main conclusion.
The conclusion here is, "It probably does." Which is a referential to the question proposed directly before it. This is tricky, we haven't encountered this type of conclusion or argument structure before. Blink and you'll miss it.
I've been doing decent on AP questions so far if I trust my gut. Got this one correct but on the BR was trying to remember how to identify a Causal relationship and thought maybe it was C due to the language used. Because it opened with a question I got tripped up and second-guessed if it was causal. I literally noted in my BR that it didn't seem to provide an observed phenomenon and that it felt like a weak causal relationship, but still changed to C. Ugh. I need to trust my gut.
This is half the battle of a test like this! Confidence in your answer choice. Most often, if you're fully focused and completely understand the stimulus and question stem - you'll choose correctly.
To master these question sets, it's essential to be able to label the conclusion correctly each time. I've noticed that each of the questions revolves in some way around that. Whether it be premises, context, etc. If you're not confident or sharp on your conclusion selection it will remain difficult.
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.
60 comments
I went too fast on this one and mixed up premise and conclusion
I'm feeling confident so far. Stay tuned for when this mindset inevitably changes lol
yayay got it right :)
wait I thought this was a conclusion
@AnaColuma "it probably does" is the conclusion. there can only be one conclusion and if a statement lends support, then it is automatically not a conclusion. "Driving position affects both comfort and the ability to see the road clearly," supports the idea that "it probably does (position of a car drivers seat impacts driver safety)"
@AnaColuma I thought the same until I took the claim and the end of the stimulus and asked "why" and then "Because" and vice versa. It didn't make sense that "x" was therefore "y" (Y being A)
WE'RE SO BACK BABY
@MRod "It probably does" is the conclusion
I almost saw this as a conclusion. I guess the language sort of made it feel like a sub-conclusion, or a rephrasing of the conclusion. Ultimately, I did choose the correct answer but I'm happy that now I can learn better sentence parsing!
I'm sometimes struggling to see when a premise could or could not be a major premise/sub-conclusion...
Is "Driving position affects both comfort and the ability to see the road clearly" not a major premise/sub-conclusion, despite being the cause & effect in the stim's causal chain?
Also, if there is a sub-conclusion in an argument (and that's the excerpt's role) are there general ways that the answer choices could be phrased?
@e.wimoine My thoughts are that I don't think that this stimulus is multi-layered with major/minor premises and conclusions. The conclusion is pretty direct at the beginning. The sentence that follows, "Driving position affects both comfort and the ability to see the road clearly" is the premise. The last two sentences are just providing a more detailed explanation of that premise, expanding on each of the two topics offered as support to the conclusion ("comfort" and "ability to see the road clearly"). The last two sentences don't necessarily provide any new ideas that would prompt us to try and understand how they are inter-connected. So, I would just see it more as a detailed expansion/explanation of the premise. Would love to hear other thoughts as well!
honestly I got this wrong cuz I changed my answer cuz I told myself there's no way the answer is that obvious, due to my trauma with NA.
is it wrong to say that a cause (in a causal relationship) will always be a premise in questions like these?
So what's worked for me with these past few questions is really just reading the stem and stim all the way through. I have a tendency to want to fly though the questions, but especially with these AP Q's I get tripped up with the wording. Super obvious I know, but it has helped.
Can anyone dumb this down for me? How is it not the conclusion? Maybe my brain has been fogged from countless LR but everything after "Driving position affects both comfort and the ability to see the road clearly" is just evidence and facts that support this claim right?
Ex. "The better the visibility from the drivers seat, the more aware the driver can be of road conditions and other vehicles". This just further proves that Driving position affects both comfort and the ability to see the road clearly..
I thought it was the conclusion, too. I scanned though the rest of the stim trying to find a hint of another conclusion but settled on that one. I dont understand either :(
@ReneBarseghian I saw the "It probably does" as the conclusion. I can't really explain why I did it, but it felt intuitive b/c the statement after that felt like evidence, not a conclusion. For me it went like this:
Driving blah blah blah? (establishes argument)
It probably does (conclusion)
Driving position affects blah blah blah (evidence for argument, argument goes on to explain its position)
@ReneBarseghian "It probably does" is the conclusion after the question in the first sentence was posed. You have to remember "it" is referring to something and that something is the question from the first sentence. As such everything after that conclusion is a premise to support the conclusion. It can't be the conclusion because what support does it garner from the other sentences. I hope this helps.
While I got the question right, I went over time because the answer seemed too simple/ on-the-nose :(
NEVER BACK DOWN NEVER WHAT
so the first two sentences are not a phenomenon?
I keep narrowing it down to two answers and choosing the wrong answer !!!!
I don't know why but 3 star difficulty questions seem to be my 5 star difficulty questions. I struggle so much with them and then 5 star questions seem less intense somehow
damnnn I read it quick and immediately thought it was the conclusion
Same....
I chose E but struggled with C for 10 or so seconds, because I didn't scrutinize C beyond the "causal mechanism" part. It seems that the answer choices often refer to other sentences in the passage, I need to make sure to identify whether those track correctly as well.
So if the excerpt was an observation, C would have been correct? But you also mention the excerpt is a rhetorical question, which is a declarative statement/observation, so I still don't see why this wouldn't also be considered a causal mechanism for an observed phenomenon.
i dont understand why we cant just look at the statement and decide if its a premise or a conclusion or something else. Like why do we have to translate everything into how the logic works?
honestly if that works for you and you're doing well then don't worry as much about the logic. I agree, I've been getting super confused with the logic part. I'll get the answer correct, but then when I listen to the logic explanation I get lost. Definitely do what's best for you!!
Agreed, it's as simple as that, and I use this approach.
Is it an intermediate conclusion? It seems like the two sentences following the argument part in question support that argument part, making the two sentences premises that support the intermediate conclusion that supports the main conclusion.
The conclusion here is, "It probably does." Which is a referential to the question proposed directly before it. This is tricky, we haven't encountered this type of conclusion or argument structure before. Blink and you'll miss it.
I've been doing decent on AP questions so far if I trust my gut. Got this one correct but on the BR was trying to remember how to identify a Causal relationship and thought maybe it was C due to the language used. Because it opened with a question I got tripped up and second-guessed if it was causal. I literally noted in my BR that it didn't seem to provide an observed phenomenon and that it felt like a weak causal relationship, but still changed to C. Ugh. I need to trust my gut.
This is half the battle of a test like this! Confidence in your answer choice. Most often, if you're fully focused and completely understand the stimulus and question stem - you'll choose correctly.
I am horrible at these questions... Any advice? #feedback #help
I would suggest working on grammar lessons from the foundations section. It really helps when you're able to distinguish a premise from a conclusion.
To master these question sets, it's essential to be able to label the conclusion correctly each time. I've noticed that each of the questions revolves in some way around that. Whether it be premises, context, etc. If you're not confident or sharp on your conclusion selection it will remain difficult.
I am crushing these. Making me nervous because I know there will be one to come along and slap my hand
I was thrown off by "probably" because I thought the conclusion couldn't be this weak. :/