@CYS1123 simply because they were not stated. The critic is not challenging the professor's assumptions, they are challenging the professor's statements and specifically addressing the conclusion.
I picked A, does the idea that rap is not performed idiosyncratically and conforms to the public not attack the idea that rap is individualistic and non-traditional?
EDIT: A) doesn't say challenges the conclusion, whoopsie
Rapping to me seems more individualistic. All you need is a pen and paper and lyrical mind, and vocals, and some form of beat and rhyme, and presto! you are a rapper
this was rly simple dont get tripped up yall. He responds by addressing the conclusion (speaks about each point in his conclusion).... so I looked for the ac with conclusion stated and moved on.
got it right, but was 30 seconds over time. was a bit difficult for me to figure out exactly where the conclusions were. once I got that though it made much more sense. gotta get better with my conclusion identifying game
this is the relatively rare instance in which the critic would say the professor's premises are incorrect (they do not work alone, or it is a formal process to learn how to rap). it's usually not going to be the right answer for these questions.
Great question. I believe they would attack the premises directly, just like the person above said. They would attack the premise that they work alone and also the premise that learning rap is not as formal as learning an instrument, lastly the premise that says rappers do not take other musicians into account when creating their music.
If it helps anyone, I went into this question with my strategy for point-of-disagreement questions. I first summarized the professor's argument and then the critics. It is not explicitly stated but the music critic disagrees with the professor's conclusion that rap music is individualistic and non-traditional. From using this strategy, I knew that the method of reasoning had to do with disagreeing or "challenging" the conclusion.
I can see why E is tempting because the critic touches on both aspects mentioned in the conclusion, but the critic mainly attacks the conclusion by showing that there are certain things he forgot to consider when forming his conclusion.
I still dont get how E is wrong. I still read the critic challenging the professor's 2 points
(non traditional and individualistic.)
The critic challenges the non traditional part by stating that rap has in of itself tradition
(which is weak but still a challenge).
The critic challenges the individualistic point by stating that rap music is not individualistic since it conforms to the public's preferences. (also weak but still a challenge)
It states the claims set by the professor, not the conclusion itself. The conclusion being non traditional and individualistic. Essentially, stating the critic does not challenge the conclusion itself, just the premises. I think you have just confused premise for the conclusion because of the grammar being tricky. Hope this helps.
I am getting these right, but feel like I could easily get them wrong. This felt like a 4 star. I had it narrowed down to A and B. Decided on B after 4 minutes. Ended up deciding against A, because the critic actually attacks damn near everything about the argument. So it stating only 1 premise did not seem good enough.
The music critic says, "And rap musicians do not perform purely idiosyncratically but conform their work to the preferences of the public."
It can only be inferred/ assumed that this is a response to the professor's point about rap being individualistic, but the music critic does not explicitly say it is, like they do with rap being non-traditional. Is that the reason (E) is incorrect? Because the music critic only challenges challenges group of claims explicitly?
I think one reason is bc the music critic says rap is not PURELY idiosyncratic we cannot rlly deduce from this how idiosyncratic rap is. It can be very or it can be minimal. The prof says rap is extremely individualistic which doesn't mean there's no individuality.. it leaves room for some individuality. So, saying rap is not purely idiosyncratic and that rap is extremely individualistic do not contradict. I think if the professor said rap is purely or only individualistic then answer E would be more appealing.
E is wrong bc the critic does not challenge any of the profs premises. The sentence ur referring to where the prof calls rap individualistic is a conclusion not a premise. But even if it was a premise the critic's claims does not prove the profs conclusion wrong bc of the fact that the music critic says rap is not PURELY idiosyncratic we cannot rlly deduce from this how idiosyncratic rap is. It can be very or it can be minimal. The prof says rap is extremely individualistic which doesn't mean there's no individuality.. it leaves room for some individuality. So, saying rap is not purely idiosyncratic and that rap is extremely individualistic do not contradict. I think if the professor said rap is purely or only individualistic and it was part of a premise rather than a conclusion then A (which is basically E but stating only one of the profs premises was challenged) would be more appealing.
Me! I had the most issues with weird wording in some of the AP arguments, plus needing some definitions. For whatever reason, these feel straightforward by comparison.
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
But why should I assume that the professor didn't take those factors into account just because he didnt mention them?
@CYS1123 simply because they were not stated. The critic is not challenging the professor's assumptions, they are challenging the professor's statements and specifically addressing the conclusion.
Oh well, the only question I got wrong in this section and I got the BR right. I'll take it as a win
was between B and E and for whatever reason chose E and knew it was wrong and then got the BR correct instantly. how do i stop doing that 🙃
@Gracetorres151 I keep doing the exact same thing
I picked A, does the idea that rap is not performed idiosyncratically and conforms to the public not attack the idea that rap is individualistic and non-traditional?
EDIT: A) doesn't say challenges the conclusion, whoopsie
Rapping to me seems more individualistic. All you need is a pen and paper and lyrical mind, and vocals, and some form of beat and rhyme, and presto! you are a rapper
that's a big word for elmo
bro i'm cooking these MOR questions Yass
chose A then switched to B during blind review LFG
this was rly simple dont get tripped up yall. He responds by addressing the conclusion (speaks about each point in his conclusion).... so I looked for the ac with conclusion stated and moved on.
@erarabiameyer yeah he immediately attacks the conclusion (tradition) and then provides two new examples.
i immediately prephased that the answer might suggest that he responded by providing an alternative explanation
this section suuuuuuucccked
got it right, but was 30 seconds over time. was a bit difficult for me to figure out exactly where the conclusions were. once I got that though it made much more sense. gotta get better with my conclusion identifying game
@aldertree00644 me too! not just 30 seconds, it was almost a minute until it made sense that the correct one was A!
Me and Bro talking about the new Carti album.
Who is J.Y.'s favorite rapper?
probably yuno miles
@michaelbagh03629 martin luther king, shout out to big bro.
struggled with this section the most out of all of them and ive watched the videos numerous times
6/7 THATS A WIN!!!
#feedback in the written explanation of correct AC B, it says "rappers can work along, they" instead of "alone"
can someone give me examples of how the critic would hypothetically provide "evidence against the professor’s premises"?
#help
this is the relatively rare instance in which the critic would say the professor's premises are incorrect (they do not work alone, or it is a formal process to learn how to rap). it's usually not going to be the right answer for these questions.
Great question. I believe they would attack the premises directly, just like the person above said. They would attack the premise that they work alone and also the premise that learning rap is not as formal as learning an instrument, lastly the premise that says rappers do not take other musicians into account when creating their music.
If it helps anyone, I went into this question with my strategy for point-of-disagreement questions. I first summarized the professor's argument and then the critics. It is not explicitly stated but the music critic disagrees with the professor's conclusion that rap music is individualistic and non-traditional. From using this strategy, I knew that the method of reasoning had to do with disagreeing or "challenging" the conclusion.
I can see why E is tempting because the critic touches on both aspects mentioned in the conclusion, but the critic mainly attacks the conclusion by showing that there are certain things he forgot to consider when forming his conclusion.
#help
I still dont get how E is wrong. I still read the critic challenging the professor's 2 points
(non traditional and individualistic.)
The critic challenges the non traditional part by stating that rap has in of itself tradition
(which is weak but still a challenge).
The critic challenges the individualistic point by stating that rap music is not individualistic since it conforms to the public's preferences. (also weak but still a challenge)
plse help.
It states the claims set by the professor, not the conclusion itself. The conclusion being non traditional and individualistic. Essentially, stating the critic does not challenge the conclusion itself, just the premises. I think you have just confused premise for the conclusion because of the grammar being tricky. Hope this helps.
I am getting all of these wrong. Between NA and MR I might die.
I am getting these right, but feel like I could easily get them wrong. This felt like a 4 star. I had it narrowed down to A and B. Decided on B after 4 minutes. Ended up deciding against A, because the critic actually attacks damn near everything about the argument. So it stating only 1 premise did not seem good enough.
Yo, yo, yo!
All you sucka MC's ain't got nothin' on me
From my grades, to my lines, you can't touch Kevin G
Im a mathlete, the nerd is inferred
But forget what you heard, I'm like James Bond the third
Sha-sha shaken, not stirred, I'm Kevin Gnapoor
The G's silent when I sneak in your door
I make love to your woman on the bathroom floor
I don't play it like Shaggy, you'll know it was me
Cause the next time you see her she'd be like
Ohhhhhh, Kevin G.!
Happy holidays, everybody!
This is gold, haha. My mom and I would always joke about this. Happy Holidays!
Omg thank you for bringing in such great humor… HAHAH!!!
The music critic says, "And rap musicians do not perform purely idiosyncratically but conform their work to the preferences of the public."
It can only be inferred/ assumed that this is a response to the professor's point about rap being individualistic, but the music critic does not explicitly say it is, like they do with rap being non-traditional. Is that the reason (E) is incorrect? Because the music critic only challenges challenges group of claims explicitly?
#feedback #help
I think one reason is bc the music critic says rap is not PURELY idiosyncratic we cannot rlly deduce from this how idiosyncratic rap is. It can be very or it can be minimal. The prof says rap is extremely individualistic which doesn't mean there's no individuality.. it leaves room for some individuality. So, saying rap is not purely idiosyncratic and that rap is extremely individualistic do not contradict. I think if the professor said rap is purely or only individualistic then answer E would be more appealing.
Edit:
E is wrong bc the critic does not challenge any of the profs premises. The sentence ur referring to where the prof calls rap individualistic is a conclusion not a premise. But even if it was a premise the critic's claims does not prove the profs conclusion wrong bc of the fact that the music critic says rap is not PURELY idiosyncratic we cannot rlly deduce from this how idiosyncratic rap is. It can be very or it can be minimal. The prof says rap is extremely individualistic which doesn't mean there's no individuality.. it leaves room for some individuality. So, saying rap is not purely idiosyncratic and that rap is extremely individualistic do not contradict. I think if the professor said rap is purely or only individualistic and it was part of a premise rather than a conclusion then A (which is basically E but stating only one of the profs premises was challenged) would be more appealing.
Broke my streak :(
I was able to get all the MoR questions right but not the AP. What is not connecting? Did anyone else have this issue?
same. i think it was just i hadnt reviewed the parts of an argument, but as it went along it refreshed my memory.
Me! I had the most issues with weird wording in some of the AP arguments, plus needing some definitions. For whatever reason, these feel straightforward by comparison.