Now here's a great example of a question where translating abstract stimulus language into concrete and familiar examples is so important to understand the argument and its underlying logic (assumption). Like JY said, LSAT writers intentionally use abstract and overcomplicated language to obscure the logic, and one of the ways in which you can counter that is by simply translating vague principles and descriptions into simple, intuitive, and easily digestible examples that you can then work with. Now that I think of it, it's one of the most valuable LSAT skills in general and I see JY using it all the time when he is dissecting questions in LR.
A. how many mental illnesses being discussed is irrelevant to the reasoning of the argument
B. this is nearly a restatement of a premise. nutritional factors is already considered under organic factors
C. yes, because if different cultures determine SIGNIFICANTLY how often or how intense the symptoms manifest themselves, it doesn’t necessarily follow that organic factors MUST be the cause of the global variation
Eliminated B on the basis that I didn't think it was in conflict with the initial conclusion. It actually helps explain why organic factors are not evenly distributed - since culture carries nutritinal variance which in turn affects the organic factors.
so when the question talked about compound in the brain, I immediately thought about iron, or some mineral/vitamin that we need to do brain stuff. that choice made the connection that B supported the conclusion instead of of a flaw more clear.
Ultimately got the question right via POE. But "culture" confused me because couldn't that be viewed as an organic factor contributing to the symptoms?
@MichaelCrout When they say "organic factor" they are mainly referring to physical factors. Culture can be seen more as an intangible social influence, not organic in a biological kind of way.
@MichaelCrout In other contexts yes, this tripped me up too. But the first sentence explains that organic factors are things like defiencies in brain compounds, so I used this context to assume that it was more of a biological context. Also, the passage doesn't mention culture and generally it's best to try to stick to what's explicitly mentioned. Context clues are key!
If while reading the stem, you immediately identify what's wrong with the argument, is it advisable to hunt the answer, and if its lines up exactly with your assumption, choose it and move on?
The video is low priority to watch because you already got it right, it will be marked as high priority to watch if you got it wrong so you understand why, so it is specific to you.
Got it right 25 seconds faster than target but second guessed myself in BR and chose B which is a very attractive answer but it reflects the first sentence pretty well IMO.
Still don't get how cultural differences can significantly affect symptoms of mental illnesses. It's my understanding that culture means language, food, traditions, literature, and etc. But it doesn't explain nor make sense in the frame of the argument.
Or was the word "culture" an overarching term to be politically correct and subtly hint to genetical differences between ethnicities? If that's the case, only then it starts to make sense.
Common symptoms are visual and auditory hallucinations.
In, let's say, America, someone experiencing those symptoms is considered abnormal, or ill, and we apply a clinical lens to it, because culturally, those people are labeled as "crazy". We have a medical diagnosis for that.
Now pretend we are in an indigenous tribe somewhere, and culturally, shamans are a large part of their way of life. It is believed that those shamans see and hear messages from the universe or gods. Culturally, what we consider hallucinations, they are considered a blessing. This person will be respected. Schizophrenia doesn't exist to them. Therefore, the symptoms aren't even symptoms.
The cultural norms between the United States and a remote tribe somewhere are very different, so how someone with auditory and visual hallucinations will be treated will be very different.
Hopefully, this makes some sense. I think this is what they are kind of trying to say, or at least the way I interpreted it. The way this question is worded is very strange.
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!
Sorry, you need a subscription for that.
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.
117 comments
Hoping these are the least common questions. Haven't gotten a single one right.
Paper trail
I love that I got this right because the last one I blew
just had a feeling it was C and got it right! sometimes I'm on a roll and other days I bomb every question horrendously.
Now here's a great example of a question where translating abstract stimulus language into concrete and familiar examples is so important to understand the argument and its underlying logic (assumption). Like JY said, LSAT writers intentionally use abstract and overcomplicated language to obscure the logic, and one of the ways in which you can counter that is by simply translating vague principles and descriptions into simple, intuitive, and easily digestible examples that you can then work with. Now that I think of it, it's one of the most valuable LSAT skills in general and I see JY using it all the time when he is dissecting questions in LR.
these are difficult :/
Fasting while doing these questions is not the move damn...
@miketrout27 no literally, i had to take a break from studying during fasting
A. how many mental illnesses being discussed is irrelevant to the reasoning of the argument
B. this is nearly a restatement of a premise. nutritional factors is already considered under organic factors
C. yes, because if different cultures determine SIGNIFICANTLY how often or how intense the symptoms manifest themselves, it doesn’t necessarily follow that organic factors MUST be the cause of the global variation
D. author doesn’t assume this
E. author doesn’t assume this either
Ok I guess i'm killing these questions
I guess we have to be careful with assume/ presume answer choices.
Eliminated B on the basis that I didn't think it was in conflict with the initial conclusion. It actually helps explain why organic factors are not evenly distributed - since culture carries nutritinal variance which in turn affects the organic factors.
anthro heads rise
I wish there was a dislike button for the explanation video and descriptions.
damn answer choice b was such a good trap...
so when the question talked about compound in the brain, I immediately thought about iron, or some mineral/vitamin that we need to do brain stuff. that choice made the connection that B supported the conclusion instead of of a flaw more clear.
@AlizaGGG same
i do not like these.
4/4 im killing itt
Ultimately got the question right via POE. But "culture" confused me because couldn't that be viewed as an organic factor contributing to the symptoms?
@MichaelCrout When they say "organic factor" they are mainly referring to physical factors. Culture can be seen more as an intangible social influence, not organic in a biological kind of way.
@MichaelCrout In other contexts yes, this tripped me up too. But the first sentence explains that organic factors are things like defiencies in brain compounds, so I used this context to assume that it was more of a biological context. Also, the passage doesn't mention culture and generally it's best to try to stick to what's explicitly mentioned. Context clues are key!
How dependable is the "hunt the answer" strategy?
If while reading the stem, you immediately identify what's wrong with the argument, is it advisable to hunt the answer, and if its lines up exactly with your assumption, choose it and move on?
You Try - Symptoms of Mental Illnesses -
Now that, JY, I have been trying.
Had the write answer and then I second guessed myself brrruhhhhh
I seem always to get questions with low priority right and questions with high priority wrong. Is anyone else experiencing this, and have any tips?
The video is low priority to watch because you already got it right, it will be marked as high priority to watch if you got it wrong so you understand why, so it is specific to you.
Oh, haha, I was totally misinterpreting what it meant, thanks!
Got it right 25 seconds faster than target but second guessed myself in BR and chose B which is a very attractive answer but it reflects the first sentence pretty well IMO.
Please help!
Still don't get how cultural differences can significantly affect symptoms of mental illnesses. It's my understanding that culture means language, food, traditions, literature, and etc. But it doesn't explain nor make sense in the frame of the argument.
Or was the word "culture" an overarching term to be politically correct and subtly hint to genetical differences between ethnicities? If that's the case, only then it starts to make sense.
Take schizophrenia as an example-
Common symptoms are visual and auditory hallucinations.
In, let's say, America, someone experiencing those symptoms is considered abnormal, or ill, and we apply a clinical lens to it, because culturally, those people are labeled as "crazy". We have a medical diagnosis for that.
Now pretend we are in an indigenous tribe somewhere, and culturally, shamans are a large part of their way of life. It is believed that those shamans see and hear messages from the universe or gods. Culturally, what we consider hallucinations, they are considered a blessing. This person will be respected. Schizophrenia doesn't exist to them. Therefore, the symptoms aren't even symptoms.
The cultural norms between the United States and a remote tribe somewhere are very different, so how someone with auditory and visual hallucinations will be treated will be very different.
Hopefully, this makes some sense. I think this is what they are kind of trying to say, or at least the way I interpreted it. The way this question is worded is very strange.
i thought the same thing
Does the causation vs conditional page linked at the bottom still exist im getting a 404 error