For question 4, I rationalized A saying that if there are more people who shirk their workplace responsibilities looking for jobs than those who are conscientious (let's say 2:1 ratio), then it makes sense that they would be more likely to find a job. They are more plentiful in the job market. Help me understand please
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.
4 comments
For question 4, I rationalized A saying that if there are more people who shirk their workplace responsibilities looking for jobs than those who are conscientious (let's say 2:1 ratio), then it makes sense that they would be more likely to find a job. They are more plentiful in the job market. Help me understand please
@AubreeGarcia But how would each individual person's chances of being hired be higher merely because more of that kind of person is looking for a job?
Slackers on average have a 60% chance of getting hired
Conscientious people on average have have a 40% chance of getting hired
This is a claim about individuals within each group. A given slacker, on average, is more likely to be hired than a conscientious person.
I think you're interpreting the situation as "why are more slackers hired?" That could be explained by more slackers looking for jobs.
But the question is actually "why are (individual) slackers more likely to find a job"?
@Kevin_Lin thank you!
first