#feedback I'd love it if we could get a link to view the question with answer choices by themselves before receiving the answer and walking through the explanations presented in this section. That way, we would benefit from both doing the actual question and reviewing them with comprehensive explanations.
^This goes for all RC/LR questions that we don't also get tested on. Thanks!
Anybody else not finding a quick view option? Author's attitude is an area with which I struggle and really wanted the option to answer on my own first. Thanks!
would it be wrong that I simply looked at the verbs used and quickly eliminated ABDE?
I didn't think that the author showed respect or admiration/appreciation. the author was definitely neutral toward experts, so I just jumped at C (and read it to confirm the whole thing sounded right) #help
I guess I just disagree with your analysis for A, although I overall agree that C is the best answer. Here is why.
When it asks for "expert testimony", it seems quite fair and even the best interpretation to bifurcate the custom-made illustrations from "expert testimony." The two might be complementary, but they are not one "thing", right? Does that make sense?
Upon the distinction of the two, would it then not make sense to say that the verbose nature of the testimonies makes it less effective in either one, establishing the facts of the case or two, assisting one side in making their case? And given that, would it be unfair to classify the author as skeptical of that? I think the broader point is that without the illustrations, he is skeptical that the facts could be clearly outlined with solely an expert testimony.
Additionally, C states "...awareness of the limitations..." while that is definitely a tempered or less extreme than the verbiage in A, am I wrong to say that they're on the same "spectrum" of skepticism?
Appreciate the videos and the lessons. Hope this doesn't come across as abrasive.
Reading the passage and answering questions about what it said is pretty straight forward. It's when they want you to read OFF the page that things can go awry. Inferring information about what the author's attitude is or what they're likely to believe as a result of their beliefs drives me crazy!
i ruled out A because I thought appreciate was too strong. i just saw the author's view as neutral leaning towards trusting their perspective. i guess that could be see as "appreciate"... thoughts?
#feedback even when introducing new concepts, even if it's not a full "you try," it'd be nice to get the questions and answers in text form first so we can give it a shot ourselves and then see if our instinct matches up with the correct answer, as explained in the video! tyyy mucho
I found this question relatively harder than all other questions up until now. Any advice on how to annotate at first to remember the author's attitude towards the medical testimony?
I agree C is the perfect answer. However the explanation for A on its own feels incomplete because it does not break down the phrase "relies on", which leaves unclear the liberties we can take in interpretting answers.
Reading the text, one interpretation is that we have
1. The expert's testimony, which relies on
2. a seperate entity, Illustrations.
If they are seperate entities, and the text supports that purely verbal info is hard to understand, it would seem that by the interpretation of Effectiveness as Understandability, the author/text are indicating that the testimony ALONE is in fact not effective, which could be read as Skepticism.
tldr: when one thing RELIES ON another, can they be said to be the same thing? Must the author's attitude towards one thing include all things connected to that thing? Im sure it varies but the answer seems to take this for granted.
could we have back the ability to review and click on specific answers like LR section? That was helpful to focus on one specific answer I may not have understood.
4
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!
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.
27 comments
how am I supposed to practice low-res summaries if I cant draw on the test like he does in the videos?
#feedback I'd love it if we could get a link to view the question with answer choices by themselves before receiving the answer and walking through the explanations presented in this section. That way, we would benefit from both doing the actual question and reviewing them with comprehensive explanations.
^This goes for all RC/LR questions that we don't also get tested on. Thanks!
Anybody else not finding a quick view option? Author's attitude is an area with which I struggle and really wanted the option to answer on my own first. Thanks!
would it be wrong that I simply looked at the verbs used and quickly eliminated ABDE?
I didn't think that the author showed respect or admiration/appreciation. the author was definitely neutral toward experts, so I just jumped at C (and read it to confirm the whole thing sounded right) #help
Kevin,
I guess I just disagree with your analysis for A, although I overall agree that C is the best answer. Here is why.
When it asks for "expert testimony", it seems quite fair and even the best interpretation to bifurcate the custom-made illustrations from "expert testimony." The two might be complementary, but they are not one "thing", right? Does that make sense?
Upon the distinction of the two, would it then not make sense to say that the verbose nature of the testimonies makes it less effective in either one, establishing the facts of the case or two, assisting one side in making their case? And given that, would it be unfair to classify the author as skeptical of that? I think the broader point is that without the illustrations, he is skeptical that the facts could be clearly outlined with solely an expert testimony.
Additionally, C states "...awareness of the limitations..." while that is definitely a tempered or less extreme than the verbiage in A, am I wrong to say that they're on the same "spectrum" of skepticism?
Appreciate the videos and the lessons. Hope this doesn't come across as abrasive.
Andrew
Reading the passage and answering questions about what it said is pretty straight forward. It's when they want you to read OFF the page that things can go awry. Inferring information about what the author's attitude is or what they're likely to believe as a result of their beliefs drives me crazy!
i ruled out A because I thought appreciate was too strong. i just saw the author's view as neutral leaning towards trusting their perspective. i guess that could be see as "appreciate"... thoughts?
I skipped every answer except for C because the author def did not admire anyone lol
#feedback even when introducing new concepts, even if it's not a full "you try," it'd be nice to get the questions and answers in text form first so we can give it a shot ourselves and then see if our instinct matches up with the correct answer, as explained in the video! tyyy mucho
I found this question relatively harder than all other questions up until now. Any advice on how to annotate at first to remember the author's attitude towards the medical testimony?
I agree C is the perfect answer. However the explanation for A on its own feels incomplete because it does not break down the phrase "relies on", which leaves unclear the liberties we can take in interpretting answers.
Reading the text, one interpretation is that we have
1. The expert's testimony, which relies on
2. a seperate entity, Illustrations.
If they are seperate entities, and the text supports that purely verbal info is hard to understand, it would seem that by the interpretation of Effectiveness as Understandability, the author/text are indicating that the testimony ALONE is in fact not effective, which could be read as Skepticism.
tldr: when one thing RELIES ON another, can they be said to be the same thing? Must the author's attitude towards one thing include all things connected to that thing? Im sure it varies but the answer seems to take this for granted.
#feedback there is no option to speed up, open in full screen or add subtitles here
could we have back the ability to review and click on specific answers like LR section? That was helpful to focus on one specific answer I may not have understood.