@adzballroom Someone else can correct me if I am wrong but I believe 46 is SA (instead of NA) because it doesn't say the argument's conclusion relies on this assumption. If (insert answer choice) is assumed then the conclusion will follow logically, but it isn't necessary to assume (insert answer choice). Another alternate answer choice not in our A-E selection could suffice whereas in NA that is not the case.
"Which one of the following situations violates the food labeling regulation?".
First, what's our goal? To find the answer choice that violates the reasoning, that I am assuming is in the stimulus. Okay, brain, so we think it is either must be True/false, weakens, or Principle. Weakens we can get rid of because it's not asking us to invalidate the food labeling regulation's logic, but its asking for us to find an example. Finally, principle is looking for a generalized explanation that is being violated, but we want a specific situation. Therefore, it has to be Must Be False. All of the other types of reasoning don't accomplish these goals, so it can't be anything else.
@schusterkarli487 most of the NA question stems will say the argument REQUIRES this assumption while the SA question stems will say the conclusion follows logically with this assumption
You might want to go back through the curriculum for a review but in short, weaken means you pick the answer that punches the argument in the face. Descriptive weakening means you pick the answer that describes how the argument should be punched in the face
Not gonna lie, I was scared they were gonna quiz us on every type of LR question like in the individual drills for each section. 🥲 Glad it's just the question stems because I never move past a quiz or drills until I am happy with my score. Ahhh!
In other words, I appreciate the ultimate LR quiz being left to our choice in doing whenever in the drills/practice (which I will do after doing RC section). 😅
Question 37 doesn't make any sense to try and guess without context. How are we supposed to know that "Which one of the following situations violates the food labeling regulation?" means it is a Must Be False stem?
SA and PSA differ in how close to valid they make the conclusion. A PSA AC just needs to get close. A SA AC needs to get to 100% validity. So a SA question stem, will essentially ask "which of the following ACs justifies the conclusion". In contrast a PSA question stem will appear as "which of the following most justifies the conclusion" Notice how the PSA gives you a bit of wiggle room whilst the SA gives you none?
Strengthen and MSS questions are fundamentally different in what they are asking you to do. In a MSS question, you are asked to assume that all the premises given in the stimulus are true. From this assumption, which AC can be concluded. In a strengthen question, the stimulus contains a full argument. The question is asking for an AC that if added as a premise would make the argument's conclusion closer to being valid. In other words, in a MSS question, you are asked to find a conclusion for the stimulus. In a strengthening question, you are asked to find a premise for the stimulus.
If you keep in mind what each question stem is asking you to do, it becomes much easier to distinguish between them.
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.
79 comments
Can anyone explain 46 pls
@adzballroom Someone else can correct me if I am wrong but I believe 46 is SA (instead of NA) because it doesn't say the argument's conclusion relies on this assumption. If (insert answer choice) is assumed then the conclusion will follow logically, but it isn't necessary to assume (insert answer choice). Another alternate answer choice not in our A-E selection could suffice whereas in NA that is not the case.
45/46 - stumped by #37
This was really helpful as a review of the question types in LR. Thank you!
Can anyone explain why Question 37 "Which one of the following situations violates the food labeling regulation?" is MBF and not Rule-Application?
42/46 not bad. lets roll.
@Gregmjr Same!
41/45
33/46. Number 7 was tricky
32/46- in 6 min
I love these I feel like they should be incorporate way more to understand and recognize better.
question 37 confused me.
@Veebeelee seconding this #help
@LSATurd
Okay, I am here to (Try to) explain.
"Which one of the following situations violates the food labeling regulation?".
First, what's our goal? To find the answer choice that violates the reasoning, that I am assuming is in the stimulus. Okay, brain, so we think it is either must be True/false, weakens, or Principle. Weakens we can get rid of because it's not asking us to invalidate the food labeling regulation's logic, but its asking for us to find an example. Finally, principle is looking for a generalized explanation that is being violated, but we want a specific situation. Therefore, it has to be Must Be False. All of the other types of reasoning don't accomplish these goals, so it can't be anything else.
@Veebeelee yeah, it needed more context. I assumed we were applying a principle, but we weren't given any indication in either direction.
Whats the difference between sufficient assumption and necessary assumption questions? I am struggling?
@schusterkarli487 most of the NA question stems will say the argument REQUIRES this assumption while the SA question stems will say the conclusion follows logically with this assumption
I'm confused. What's the difference between 'weaken' and 'descriptive weaken/flaw'??
You might want to go back through the curriculum for a review but in short, weaken means you pick the answer that punches the argument in the face. Descriptive weakening means you pick the answer that describes how the argument should be punched in the face
would love a way to flag and come back to specific questions!
Not gonna lie, I was scared they were gonna quiz us on every type of LR question like in the individual drills for each section. 🥲 Glad it's just the question stems because I never move past a quiz or drills until I am happy with my score. Ahhh!
In other words, I appreciate the ultimate LR quiz being left to our choice in doing whenever in the drills/practice (which I will do after doing RC section). 😅
Never saw "Must be False" on the CC
Question 37 doesn't make any sense to try and guess without context. How are we supposed to know that "Which one of the following situations violates the food labeling regulation?" means it is a Must Be False stem?
19.5% Flaw/Descriptive Weakening
does this mean we are going to see the most of these questions on LR section?
@mahekmallik01148 depends if this sample of 46 was randomly selected lol.
Anyone else get snagged by question 37? "Which one of the following situations violates the food labeling regulation?"
yes
yes sir
#help. What would a principle question stem look like as opposed to an SA/PSA question stem?
getting faster and more accurate lfg!
5/5 timed no BR.
HSAHFASF
for folks looking for flashcards with 7 sage Q Stem labels: https://quizlet.com/140131849/logical-reasoning-question-stems-flash-cards/
Thank you！ Very helpful!
I'm really bad at this
PSA/SA questions and Strengthen/MSS always trip me up. Anybody have any recommendations on how to differentiate the two consistently?
#help (Added by Admin)
SA and PSA differ in how close to valid they make the conclusion. A PSA AC just needs to get close. A SA AC needs to get to 100% validity. So a SA question stem, will essentially ask "which of the following ACs justifies the conclusion". In contrast a PSA question stem will appear as "which of the following most justifies the conclusion" Notice how the PSA gives you a bit of wiggle room whilst the SA gives you none?
Strengthen and MSS questions are fundamentally different in what they are asking you to do. In a MSS question, you are asked to assume that all the premises given in the stimulus are true. From this assumption, which AC can be concluded. In a strengthen question, the stimulus contains a full argument. The question is asking for an AC that if added as a premise would make the argument's conclusion closer to being valid. In other words, in a MSS question, you are asked to find a conclusion for the stimulus. In a strengthening question, you are asked to find a premise for the stimulus.
If you keep in mind what each question stem is asking you to do, it becomes much easier to distinguish between them.
Question Stem types