It seems that whenever there is an answer choice with a word that most are unlikely to know the definition of, it is the right answer. This obviously is not always the case, but i've found on numerous occasions that the answer choices I have eliminated because I was unable to easily comprehend have been the right answers.
I struggle to see the difference between the answer options of C and E. I knew it was C but answered E as I thought it was more descriptive of the situation.
The phrase 'presumably cogent' in the correct answer choice seems to indicate that the analogy supporting the main conclusion is unsupported, or baseless. In other questions, we've seen arguments presume validity in the form of baseless or unsupported conclusions (i.e. "author takes for granted"). This seems markedly different from other 'presumably cogent' arguments.
Here, we're given a clear example of why the arguer makes the conclusion that one's account of their physical environment is inaccurate. The analogized argument about physical environment is supported by the phrase "since it occurs from one particular perspective." This doesn't seem 'presumably cogent,' as the author does offer some support. I'm still not understanding why this phrase would not be proper grounds to eliminate answer choice 'C.'
doesnt A also commit the error of comparing two things in the wrong direction? my translation of A: by comparing "biases and prejudices of author is incorrect" to show "perception of physical environment is inaccurate", while in reality the stim compares the two the other way around.
JY absolutely love that you started off the video with "this is probably the hardest MOR question that we have come across". Got the question right and said "really" to this being the hardest.
I feel like the main problem with A is that it says "is incorrect," where in the stimulus it seems to actually advance both arguments. It isn't arguing against them.
For those who chose A, I think the "charitable" interpretation overly confuses why its wrong. The author thinks both lines of reasoning are correct. The only thing "flawed" here is human perception. Not the lines of reasoning. Therefore, A fails to describe how the argument proceeds.
i looked at the stim as sort of a rule + application stim. The first half of the stim is the "rule" or potentially a generalization and the second half of the stim is the application, specifically applying it in the context of hisory books. Typically, the application portion is what the author is trying to drive home, and thus is the main point of the argument. There is analogical reasoning in action in this stim, which is also used to drive the point home.
I'm so proud that I got this confidently correct. That hasn't happened for a few lessons now lol
1
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!
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.
73 comments
got this right in BR thank godddd
had to quickly look up the word "cogent"... I feel dumb XD
It seems that whenever there is an answer choice with a word that most are unlikely to know the definition of, it is the right answer. This obviously is not always the case, but i've found on numerous occasions that the answer choices I have eliminated because I was unable to easily comprehend have been the right answers.
missed this question because I misunderstood the word "cogent"
I struggle to see the difference between the answer options of C and E. I knew it was C but answered E as I thought it was more descriptive of the situation.
I knew C was correct but of course did not choose C :)
i submitted E bc of its attractiveness, whole heartedly feeling like C was correct. sigh
I think this questions was mostly hard because of the "You Try: question before
Chose E and the C for Blind Review
I was able to get this right but I don't understand how you are supposed to know that the History argument is the main conclusion. I had it backwards
I had to look up what cogent means but I feel that it still counts that I got it right :))
The phrase 'presumably cogent' in the correct answer choice seems to indicate that the analogy supporting the main conclusion is unsupported, or baseless. In other questions, we've seen arguments presume validity in the form of baseless or unsupported conclusions (i.e. "author takes for granted"). This seems markedly different from other 'presumably cogent' arguments.
Here, we're given a clear example of why the arguer makes the conclusion that one's account of their physical environment is inaccurate. The analogized argument about physical environment is supported by the phrase "since it occurs from one particular perspective." This doesn't seem 'presumably cogent,' as the author does offer some support. I'm still not understanding why this phrase would not be proper grounds to eliminate answer choice 'C.'
got it correct during blind review yay! Initially chose A then chose C
I read cogent as cognizant, and just thought it meant a convincing argument. I mean, it lead me to the right answer I guess!
doesnt A also commit the error of comparing two things in the wrong direction? my translation of A: by comparing "biases and prejudices of author is incorrect" to show "perception of physical environment is inaccurate", while in reality the stim compares the two the other way around.
A was just too messy to pick since the professor is basing the whole argument on his own reasoning.
The word Cogent did me in 😩
I picked C and changed it to A in blind review. Blargh.
JY absolutely love that you started off the video with "this is probably the hardest MOR question that we have come across". Got the question right and said "really" to this being the hardest.
175 here I come!!!
for some reason the explanations for this module leave me more confused if i got the question right lol
I feel like the main problem with A is that it says "is incorrect," where in the stimulus it seems to actually advance both arguments. It isn't arguing against them.
cogent my butt
For those who chose A, I think the "charitable" interpretation overly confuses why its wrong. The author thinks both lines of reasoning are correct. The only thing "flawed" here is human perception. Not the lines of reasoning. Therefore, A fails to describe how the argument proceeds.
i looked at the stim as sort of a rule + application stim. The first half of the stim is the "rule" or potentially a generalization and the second half of the stim is the application, specifically applying it in the context of hisory books. Typically, the application portion is what the author is trying to drive home, and thus is the main point of the argument. There is analogical reasoning in action in this stim, which is also used to drive the point home.
I'm so proud that I got this confidently correct. That hasn't happened for a few lessons now lol