It feels like a completely unwarranted assumption that avoidance of dairy may cause negative health effects. How would we have made that guess without appealing to outside knowledge (which is the last thing we ought to do on the LSAT)?
The importance I got from this question to keep in mind for future causal logic flawed questions is that this argument is flawed in that it presumes based on the only "con/negative effect of dairy" (heart disease increase from dairy) to be the ONLY EFFECT of dairy consumption. But it overlooks the other causal pathway effects that dairy can cause, others which are positive and beneficial.
Which is why the argument is flawed in that it overlooks that eventhough the consumption dairy might have the negative effect of heart disease, the prevention of dairy consumption will bring negative effects, because ITS OTHER EFFECTS which are positive are then removed from consumption such as calcium and other nutrients. But this is the flaw because the stimulus singled out on this particular effect and didn't consider the others.
It's the conclusion "maintaining good health" that makes A the correct answer. If you were focused on just heart disease and avoiding fat--then B may have trapped you like I was.
so i immediately knocked a from the options due to it using the term "eliminated" as apposed to just avoiding or decreasing consumption. avoiding doesnt neccesarily imply a total elimination...so thats where my logic screwed up
does any one else practice rephrasing "assumes, without warrant..." that does not have a negative word in the sentence into a "fails to consider.. "?' sentence
like this one is a "fails to consider.." with no negative terms and the "assumes, without warrant.." has negative term 'will not'
What helped me out with this question was the word health. By saying that you can maintain good health if you avoid dairy foods, it completely negates the possibility that your health can decrease by not eating dairy foods. When I saw the word health in reference to heart disease, I immediately saw that fault.
How do you know when to take away the negative? I mapped this as:
avoid dairy->less likely to eat fat->avoid heart disease
(all negative as in the stimulus). I got it wrong BTW. Why do you take the negative of the negative or ignore the negative and how do you know when to do that?
Starting to get really confident with this LSAT. Let me explain two years ago when I first started studying for the LSAT and then stopped I would get confident when I got the answer correct. Now I am starting to get really confident not just because I got the answer correct. But also because I am able to accurately eliminate wrong answers and explain why I got the right answer correct, and why the wrong answers are wrong. Also because im really understanding the stimulus, and I am really starting to see the patterns the test writers do in the stimulus and the wrong answers choices!!! Anyone else feel the same way!!!
One word got me, "One"- I picked D because I though it said "There is no way..." It really says, "There is no one way" which makes the answer wrong. These small mistakes kill me.
Was debating between A or B and chose B... this is my entire LSAT experience. Narrowing it down to two choice answers but picking the tempting answer over the right
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.
111 comments
It feels like a completely unwarranted assumption that avoidance of dairy may cause negative health effects. How would we have made that guess without appealing to outside knowledge (which is the last thing we ought to do on the LSAT)?
Love sitting between 2 answers and both of them end up incorrect haha
The importance I got from this question to keep in mind for future causal logic flawed questions is that this argument is flawed in that it presumes based on the only "con/negative effect of dairy" (heart disease increase from dairy) to be the ONLY EFFECT of dairy consumption. But it overlooks the other causal pathway effects that dairy can cause, others which are positive and beneficial.
Which is why the argument is flawed in that it overlooks that eventhough the consumption dairy might have the negative effect of heart disease, the prevention of dairy consumption will bring negative effects, because ITS OTHER EFFECTS which are positive are then removed from consumption such as calcium and other nutrients. But this is the flaw because the stimulus singled out on this particular effect and didn't consider the others.
i keep choosing the right answer and then changing my mind last minute im annoyed
It's the conclusion "maintaining good health" that makes A the correct answer. If you were focused on just heart disease and avoiding fat--then B may have trapped you like I was.
am i the only one that feels like his reasoning behind this was a reaching?
i keep overthinking these and choose the right answers on blind review sigh
Praying I don't break my streak 🤲🏼 i need this
so i immediately knocked a from the options due to it using the term "eliminated" as apposed to just avoiding or decreasing consumption. avoiding doesnt neccesarily imply a total elimination...so thats where my logic screwed up
does any one else practice rephrasing "assumes, without warrant..." that does not have a negative word in the sentence into a "fails to consider.. "?' sentence
like this one is a "fails to consider.." with no negative terms and the "assumes, without warrant.." has negative term 'will not'
bruh
bro wat
What helped me out with this question was the word health. By saying that you can maintain good health if you avoid dairy foods, it completely negates the possibility that your health can decrease by not eating dairy foods. When I saw the word health in reference to heart disease, I immediately saw that fault.
to me there is a lot of confusion between increase and decrease. Those are not the only two options (what about stay the same?).
How do you know when to take away the negative? I mapped this as:
avoid dairy->less likely to eat fat->avoid heart disease
(all negative as in the stimulus). I got it wrong BTW. Why do you take the negative of the negative or ignore the negative and how do you know when to do that?
Did you know it's possible to overthink LSAT questions?
Having just done the previous question, I got baited into choosing B
the difficulty level seems like BS. level 3's sometimes feel like level 5's and level 5's sometimes feel like level 2's.
Starting to get really confident with this LSAT. Let me explain two years ago when I first started studying for the LSAT and then stopped I would get confident when I got the answer correct. Now I am starting to get really confident not just because I got the answer correct. But also because I am able to accurately eliminate wrong answers and explain why I got the right answer correct, and why the wrong answers are wrong. Also because im really understanding the stimulus, and I am really starting to see the patterns the test writers do in the stimulus and the wrong answers choices!!! Anyone else feel the same way!!!
i suck at flawed questions lol
over the time by ALOTTTTT but its right lol
throws laptop across the room
One word got me, "One"- I picked D because I though it said "There is no way..." It really says, "There is no one way" which makes the answer wrong. These small mistakes kill me.
Was debating between A or B and chose B... this is my entire LSAT experience. Narrowing it down to two choice answers but picking the tempting answer over the right
These questions are brutal