Could someone give a quick summary of a 'necessary' cause, in the context of informal/causal logic? My understanding is something i's a necessary cause if the effect is present. But does it need to also be the only necessary cause? Or can there be multiple necessary causes for the same effect/outcome? My guess is yes, but want to check.
I was on the brink of solving this in BR but decided to just go with my original answer. Knew E could be right but didn't know how my original choice was wrong.
I don't understand how the conditional logic was set up and, specifically, how the causal logic would be interpreted. I feel like there are so many gaps between the foundational lessons and these drills, which makes it impossible to incorporate what we learned into our practice. Could someone simplify his response?
Man... I think I am going to become a long-term friend with this problem if I stare at it any longer. I don't know what is more confusing. My girlfriend or this problem. Probably my girlfriend... she is a work of art.
I found the best way to do this question was to focus on what the argument hinges on. Forget flaws for a second. What's the most important distinct feature that the whole thing relies on, which concept? It's about approximate age, which E answers. The others try and trick you by assuming the argument hinges on other details. And B is just confusing grammar, but this stimulus isn't Abstract to Concrete, it's Abstract to Abstract.
I wasn't attracted to answer choice D), but I had a really hard time figuring out why it's wrong. D) says that the argument "presumes, without warrant, that one never approaches a stranger unless one feels comfortable doing so". I suppose it's obvious in retrospect, but the argument doesn't assume this, so right away, this answer choice is descriptively innaccurate. Nowhere does the argument say that in order to approach a stranger, one must feel comfortable appraoching said stranger. Rather, the argument says that feeling comfortable approaching a stranger is necessary for forming long-term friendships. BUT even if it did say that comfort was necessary to approach a stranger, there could still be more than one way to achieve said comfort - it doesn't necessarily have to be similar age.
a stranger being of one's approximate age is sufficient for one to feel comfortable approaching them. BUT that doesn't mean that similar age is necessary to feel comfortable approaching a stranger.
most long term friendships begin because someone felt comfotable approaching a stranger
it does NOT follow that similar age is necessary for a long term friendship to begin because, as outlined above, similar age is NOT necessary to feel comfortable approaching a stranger
this is the first one i got wrong in a while i think i was getting too cocky and wanted to improve my time more than i wanted to have the right answer...
Got this one relatively quickly so I thought my thought process might help someone!
Argument: (In my own paraphrasing) Long term friendships are probably same age group because one is likely to feel comfortable approaching a stranger if the stranger is the same age, and most long term friendships start because someone felt comfortable approaching a stranger.
My first thought was well why couldn't long term friendships probably include people of different ages? The argument doesn't say anything about being uncomfortable approaching someone of a different age, just that one is comfortable approaching someone their age(not comparatively to any other age).
Not sure if this is the correct way of thinking but this made E jump out at me!
11
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.
137 comments
So if I understand correctly, there is a suf/nec flaw AND a causal flaw, but the correct ac only talks about the causal flaw?
Why are the explanations so longgg
I didn't understand this one at all
Fuck my fucking chuengus life
Could someone give a quick summary of a 'necessary' cause, in the context of informal/causal logic? My understanding is something i's a necessary cause if the effect is present. But does it need to also be the only necessary cause? Or can there be multiple necessary causes for the same effect/outcome? My guess is yes, but want to check.
Any useful examples would be v helpful!
Longest Explanation, but worth it. Took me an hour but...I do it all for you. J.Y.
I was on the brink of solving this in BR but decided to just go with my original answer. Knew E could be right but didn't know how my original choice was wrong.
I don't understand how the conditional logic was set up and, specifically, how the causal logic would be interpreted. I feel like there are so many gaps between the foundational lessons and these drills, which makes it impossible to incorporate what we learned into our practice. Could someone simplify his response?
Man... I think I am going to become a long-term friend with this problem if I stare at it any longer. I don't know what is more confusing. My girlfriend or this problem. Probably my girlfriend... she is a work of art.
I found the best way to do this question was to focus on what the argument hinges on. Forget flaws for a second. What's the most important distinct feature that the whole thing relies on, which concept? It's about approximate age, which E answers. The others try and trick you by assuming the argument hinges on other details. And B is just confusing grammar, but this stimulus isn't Abstract to Concrete, it's Abstract to Abstract.
Getting a 5 star question right in a minute??? Let's go!!
Picked E 22 seconds ahead very happy with my progress
are we deadass
Broke my streak ://///
I wasn't attracted to answer choice D), but I had a really hard time figuring out why it's wrong. D) says that the argument "presumes, without warrant, that one never approaches a stranger unless one feels comfortable doing so". I suppose it's obvious in retrospect, but the argument doesn't assume this, so right away, this answer choice is descriptively innaccurate. Nowhere does the argument say that in order to approach a stranger, one must feel comfortable appraoching said stranger. Rather, the argument says that feeling comfortable approaching a stranger is necessary for forming long-term friendships. BUT even if it did say that comfort was necessary to approach a stranger, there could still be more than one way to achieve said comfort - it doesn't necessarily have to be similar age.
a stranger being of one's approximate age is sufficient for one to feel comfortable approaching them. BUT that doesn't mean that similar age is necessary to feel comfortable approaching a stranger.
most long term friendships begin because someone felt comfotable approaching a stranger
it does NOT follow that similar age is necessary for a long term friendship to begin because, as outlined above, similar age is NOT necessary to feel comfortable approaching a stranger
Wow that is significantly easier than what I did to get the answer lmao
elementary lsat question really (i almost picked the wrong answer)
this is the first one i got wrong in a while i think i was getting too cocky and wanted to improve my time more than i wanted to have the right answer...
We are so back
44 secs faster than target, it's all finally paying off :')
Second time around on this question and I still don't like it
Got this one relatively quickly so I thought my thought process might help someone!
Argument: (In my own paraphrasing) Long term friendships are probably same age group because one is likely to feel comfortable approaching a stranger if the stranger is the same age, and most long term friendships start because someone felt comfortable approaching a stranger.
My first thought was well why couldn't long term friendships probably include people of different ages? The argument doesn't say anything about being uncomfortable approaching someone of a different age, just that one is comfortable approaching someone their age(not comparatively to any other age).
Not sure if this is the correct way of thinking but this made E jump out at me!