@DurodoluwaAina I may not be a whole lot of help as I am early on in my studies, but I have noticed that with many of the intermediate conclusions, you can put one of the conclusion indicator words before it and it still sounds alright. "But lately factories upstream began dumping waste into the river (Premise). Therefore/So, the river water is no longer safe to drink (intermediate conclusion)." Many of the intermediate conclusions already have these in them too. I hope this helps I am not very knowledgeable on this yet.
@DurodoluwaAina The "intermediate conclusion" is also called the "major premise." Following the "major premise," is another premise that supports it as a conclusion. This premise specifically leads into supporting the major premise. The major premise is different in that it receives support but is also support for the main conclusion. Hope this helps!
An intermediate conclusion has a supporting premise that leads to this intermediate conclusion. Then, this intermediate conclusion is a premise/support to the final conclusion.
You can try and remember it like the baseball analogy. The intermediate conclusion receives a support (a throw/ pitch) that is its premise. Then in this case , the catcher throws it to someone else (intermediate conclusion becomes a premise) for a final out that is the final conclusion.
I got the ship one wrong on level four (I think its the first question for level four, but I don't know if everyone gets the same questions each time). I initially put that the second sentence was a premise, but doubted myself and labeled it as context. I understand now that context would not provide any support for the conclusion, and this sentence did, so it should be labeled as a premise.
For the question on clinic screenings, I'm failing to see the argument made, specifically the persuasion piece. I see a collection of statements, but no element of an argument's aim. Where is the persuasion if the clinic is inarguably out of compliance? Perhaps this one is so cut and dry I'm overthinking.
@JohnM An argument that's valid is still an argument. Imagine something like "All cats are animals. My pet is a cat. So it is an animal." This is an argument because the first two statements are designed to prove the last statement. It may not feel like persuasion because the argument seems so obviously logically airtight and no one would ever question whether cats are animals. But imagine you're trying to prove that a cat is an animal to an alien that knows nothing about how we classify different creatures and the labels we give to them. The alien does know logic, however. We can prove to him that my pet cat is an animal through that argument.
@Codyw43 This happens to just be a strong argument! The premise, if true, doesn't leave room for assumptions and seems to guarantee the conclusion.
Conclusions can appear factual; what makes a conclusion a conclusion is whether or not another sentence/clause/claim provides support for you to believe it. As long as there is a premise supporting a claim, you have an argument, whether it is weak, or strong like this one.
@Ula Adding to this, I think the key word "consequently" makes this an argument. If it was worded differently such as "The route is closed. No supplies will reach the island today. " then it would not be labeled as an argument. Two facts are being stated but do not seem related. The author is not making a point.
In this example, there is language used to bridge a premise and conclusion, making it an argument.
"... the field is bare by August ..." isn't a conclusion of any kind. It either is or isn't. It's information (a factual result, not a conjecture) and therefore a premise supporting why the turf should be replaced. While we know the argument is about replacing the turf, how many matches are hosted is context for these premises but is not, in and of itself, a premise. How are we to assume that sixty matches plus concerts are "heavy use?" Maybe 100 or 1000 are. For me, this renders it context for the premises.
@Pheatherose An intermediate conclusion has a premise that goes with it to justify why it's correct. That means it's a full argument, but the speaker/writer wants to prove something else so they keep going with the argument to get to the main thing they want to justify, "the main argument". A premise is only adding support to justify the conclusion.
@JulioBarbosa There's a difference between a premise and a statement that you're saying is wrong.
"Mark: George Washington was born after Abraham Lincoln."
"Me: No, you have the timeline backwards. GW was born in 1731 and Lincoln was born in 1809."
The meaning of "you have the timeline backwards" is "GW was born after Lincoln." The fact that we have to refer to someone else'e claim to understand the conclusion doesn't mean that the other person's claim is offered to help prove the conclusion.
I'm just a little confused identifying the difference premise vs context, I understand that premises support the argument, and context is background information, but in my mind those are the same.
@jagoro If something isn't part of "why should I believe the conclusion," then it's not a premise. A premise is something that is offered to convince you of the truth of the conclusion. A claim that simply helps you understand what the argument is about, or a claim that goes against the author's argument, or a claim that is what the author is rejecting, aren't designed to help prove the author's conclusion.
52 comments
I like it, thank you
This was really fun and interactive. I like this tool
this was fun!
@SamiaJohnson01 I agree!!
I really liked this to break up the lesson!!
I'm really glad to see there are fun LSAT practice games that I can play when I have downtime or just need a break.
Okay I can't lie, I am stuggling of tease out the subtle differences between a premise and an intermediate conclusion. Can someone help?
@DurodoluwaAina I may not be a whole lot of help as I am early on in my studies, but I have noticed that with many of the intermediate conclusions, you can put one of the conclusion indicator words before it and it still sounds alright. "But lately factories upstream began dumping waste into the river (Premise). Therefore/So, the river water is no longer safe to drink (intermediate conclusion)." Many of the intermediate conclusions already have these in them too. I hope this helps I am not very knowledgeable on this yet.
@DurodoluwaAina The "intermediate conclusion" is also called the "major premise." Following the "major premise," is another premise that supports it as a conclusion. This premise specifically leads into supporting the major premise. The major premise is different in that it receives support but is also support for the main conclusion. Hope this helps!
An intermediate conclusion has a supporting premise that leads to this intermediate conclusion. Then, this intermediate conclusion is a premise/support to the final conclusion.
You can try and remember it like the baseball analogy. The intermediate conclusion receives a support (a throw/ pitch) that is its premise. Then in this case , the catcher throws it to someone else (intermediate conclusion becomes a premise) for a final out that is the final conclusion.
Maybe that helps?!
W analogy
this is a new tool. i like it
I got the ship one wrong on level four (I think its the first question for level four, but I don't know if everyone gets the same questions each time). I initially put that the second sentence was a premise, but doubted myself and labeled it as context. I understand now that context would not provide any support for the conclusion, and this sentence did, so it should be labeled as a premise.
19/20 first time :), 20/20 in the retake!
got licked beginning of round 4
This is fantastic. I usually have a difficult time being able to thoroughly understand a stimulus. Thanks youguys!
I like this game. Very helpful!
no because making it a game is like... i must get it right!!!! (by the last Q my brain felt like applesauce, thank you)
For the question on clinic screenings, I'm failing to see the argument made, specifically the persuasion piece. I see a collection of statements, but no element of an argument's aim. Where is the persuasion if the clinic is inarguably out of compliance? Perhaps this one is so cut and dry I'm overthinking.
@JohnM An argument that's valid is still an argument. Imagine something like "All cats are animals. My pet is a cat. So it is an animal." This is an argument because the first two statements are designed to prove the last statement. It may not feel like persuasion because the argument seems so obviously logically airtight and no one would ever question whether cats are animals. But imagine you're trying to prove that a cat is an animal to an alien that knows nothing about how we classify different creatures and the labels we give to them. The alien does know logic, however. We can prove to him that my pet cat is an animal through that argument.
20/20. Given that i was not perfect at the in-course exercises this surprises me. Guess they worked.
@AdamUpdike same, i found it quite fun. def happy that I can see real feedback that i am improving from the exercises!
Can't wait to use this tool at the gym!
This is SUPER helpful, thank you.
tried 4 times and finally got to the end yayy for me
@Codyw43 This happens to just be a strong argument! The premise, if true, doesn't leave room for assumptions and seems to guarantee the conclusion.
Conclusions can appear factual; what makes a conclusion a conclusion is whether or not another sentence/clause/claim provides support for you to believe it. As long as there is a premise supporting a claim, you have an argument, whether it is weak, or strong like this one.
@Ula Adding to this, I think the key word "consequently" makes this an argument. If it was worded differently such as "The route is closed. No supplies will reach the island today. " then it would not be labeled as an argument. Two facts are being stated but do not seem related. The author is not making a point.
In this example, there is language used to bridge a premise and conclusion, making it an argument.
"... the field is bare by August ..." isn't a conclusion of any kind. It either is or isn't. It's information (a factual result, not a conjecture) and therefore a premise supporting why the turf should be replaced. While we know the argument is about replacing the turf, how many matches are hosted is context for these premises but is not, in and of itself, a premise. How are we to assume that sixty matches plus concerts are "heavy use?" Maybe 100 or 1000 are. For me, this renders it context for the premises.
I am having difficulty identifying the difference between an intermediate conclusion and a premise. Can someone help to clarify the difference?
@Pheatherose An intermediate conclusion has a premise that goes with it to justify why it's correct. That means it's a full argument, but the speaker/writer wants to prove something else so they keep going with the argument to get to the main thing they want to justify, "the main argument". A premise is only adding support to justify the conclusion.
@Gio216 Thank you!
@Pheatherose No worries! :)
Me too, I've played this game for 2 hours straight. I'm still missing answers.
I marked the third sentence as context because after the previous question I thought there would only be one premise
for the farms columnist question: Why isn't the traders forecast a premise if part of the conclusion is "The traders had the effect exactly backward:"
@JulioBarbosa There's a difference between a premise and a statement that you're saying is wrong.
"Mark: George Washington was born after Abraham Lincoln."
"Me: No, you have the timeline backwards. GW was born in 1731 and Lincoln was born in 1809."
The meaning of "you have the timeline backwards" is "GW was born after Lincoln." The fact that we have to refer to someone else'e claim to understand the conclusion doesn't mean that the other person's claim is offered to help prove the conclusion.
I'm just a little confused identifying the difference premise vs context, I understand that premises support the argument, and context is background information, but in my mind those are the same.
@jagoro If something isn't part of "why should I believe the conclusion," then it's not a premise. A premise is something that is offered to convince you of the truth of the conclusion. A claim that simply helps you understand what the argument is about, or a claim that goes against the author's argument, or a claim that is what the author is rejecting, aren't designed to help prove the author's conclusion.