Does anyone else struggle with when to use the third factor analysis of a question? That the question suggests that "A" causes "B", when in reality it's "C"? I understand after watching the video that motivation was the key aspect of the passage and not productivity. However, I know this was only a 1 star question. So expect that for harder questions, it will be even harder to determine when to decide if an argument's reasoning is off because it does not consider something. If someone who's struggled with this can comment below to help me out that would be great.
I'm restarting 7 sage for the 3rd time after trying a private tutoring course. So I'm hoping this go around using a training schedule that is accomodating of my work-schedule, that I can improve my LR & RC abilities
I think the advice about breaking down the referentials is extremely helpful in dissecting the question stimulus. I will also say something that helped me understand this better was to refer back to the lesson about assumptions when filtering through each answer choice. The fewer and more reasonable assumptions each answer choice made the more logical it seems. Which made it pretty easy to eliminate down to answer choice E because it made the fewest assumptions and was worded in such a way that it only used language previously stated in the stimulus.
It's helpful to break down the question and prompt before looking at all the different choices. I got the question right but I didn't spend enough time analyzing the exact argument the author was making/all the referentials so I might have gotten it wrong if it was a harder question
The first sentence is not context. It's another premise. P1: the purpose of the posters is to increase motivation to work productively. P2: Workers are already motiviated. C: Therefore the posters are not achieving their intended purpose.
i relied on grammar very little with this question and just used the skills i learned from identifying weak arguments and assumptions. not sure if that's a logical route but i got it right loll.
I got this question, but it took me 2:25 (+1:13). My problem was mostly to understand what they actually mean those answer choices from A to E. Will this be eventually better with practice? Any advice please?
I got this question correct but it took me long to figure out. I think the habit of referring back to the referents in the clauses help to hammer home what information the author precisely brings up in a clearer way since it can remind you while you're reading.
I'm glad I got it right during the BR, but this is just showing me I need to be more careful with precise wording. The referential lesson really came in handy!!
If I feel like I know what the answer should be after reading the question stem and the stimulus alone, should I still reason my way through each answer option? Or can I just scan the answers to see if one of them matches my initial intuition?
I am confused when I utilize finding the subject and predicate vs. premise and conclusion, then the referentials on top of that. I feel like I don't have a solid grasp on how to go about each question/a checklist of steps to take.
I didn't pick Option B because I simply "felt" like it didn't make any sense in relation to the question, but I don't understand the explanation of why it's wrong. I would like to understand why this is the incorrect choice. Can someone please explain?
We need alternative video for this explanation linked to the grammar section. be nice if the person who was in previous video explained this video using the referential terms. Found using that technique useful in solving this.
Could anyone else not access this question because they need a LawHub Advantage subscription? Like, I could access all the other questions thus far, but now I suddenly need to cough up an extra $120 to see practice problems? Will this be a problem for my ability to complete the rest of this course?
0
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.
54 comments
i feel like i stuggle to understand what the actual question itself is asking us to look for in many lsat practice questions.
I got this one correct. It did take me sometime though. I was between (e) and (b).
Context, Premise, conclusion highlighted. Then its barbeque chicken from there.
Does anyone else struggle with when to use the third factor analysis of a question? That the question suggests that "A" causes "B", when in reality it's "C"? I understand after watching the video that motivation was the key aspect of the passage and not productivity. However, I know this was only a 1 star question. So expect that for harder questions, it will be even harder to determine when to decide if an argument's reasoning is off because it does not consider something. If someone who's struggled with this can comment below to help me out that would be great.
I'm restarting 7 sage for the 3rd time after trying a private tutoring course. So I'm hoping this go around using a training schedule that is accomodating of my work-schedule, that I can improve my LR & RC abilities
Got it right! Used logical reasoning from arguments lesson :D
I think the advice about breaking down the referentials is extremely helpful in dissecting the question stimulus. I will also say something that helped me understand this better was to refer back to the lesson about assumptions when filtering through each answer choice. The fewer and more reasonable assumptions each answer choice made the more logical it seems. Which made it pretty easy to eliminate down to answer choice E because it made the fewest assumptions and was worded in such a way that it only used language previously stated in the stimulus.
It's helpful to break down the question and prompt before looking at all the different choices. I got the question right but I didn't spend enough time analyzing the exact argument the author was making/all the referentials so I might have gotten it wrong if it was a harder question
The first sentence is not context. It's another premise. P1: the purpose of the posters is to increase motivation to work productively. P2: Workers are already motiviated. C: Therefore the posters are not achieving their intended purpose.
I got it right! Yay!
i relied on grammar very little with this question and just used the skills i learned from identifying weak arguments and assumptions. not sure if that's a logical route but i got it right loll.
I got this question, but it took me 2:25 (+1:13). My problem was mostly to understand what they actually mean those answer choices from A to E. Will this be eventually better with practice? Any advice please?
I got this question in less than 90 seconds LETSSS GOOO
I got it right this time! I am so proud of me and you guys too!
It helps if you read the question first. Then read the stim. I dont know it always works. Its been super helpful for me.
I got this question correct but it took me long to figure out. I think the habit of referring back to the referents in the clauses help to hammer home what information the author precisely brings up in a clearer way since it can remind you while you're reading.
I got it right on my first try, it seems very important to break down the statement and eliminate wrong answers first .
I'm glad I got it right during the BR, but this is just showing me I need to be more careful with precise wording. The referential lesson really came in handy!!
If i work through this question exactly like this, how am i ever going to finish this test in time???
This is a great explanation.
If I feel like I know what the answer should be after reading the question stem and the stimulus alone, should I still reason my way through each answer option? Or can I just scan the answers to see if one of them matches my initial intuition?
I am confused when I utilize finding the subject and predicate vs. premise and conclusion, then the referentials on top of that. I feel like I don't have a solid grasp on how to go about each question/a checklist of steps to take.
I did the right analysis identifying the conclusion and its referentials and still picked the wrong one lol
Doesnt make any Fing sense
I didn't pick Option B because I simply "felt" like it didn't make any sense in relation to the question, but I don't understand the explanation of why it's wrong. I would like to understand why this is the incorrect choice. Can someone please explain?
We need alternative video for this explanation linked to the grammar section. be nice if the person who was in previous video explained this video using the referential terms. Found using that technique useful in solving this.
NAILED THIS!!!
Could anyone else not access this question because they need a LawHub Advantage subscription? Like, I could access all the other questions thus far, but now I suddenly need to cough up an extra $120 to see practice problems? Will this be a problem for my ability to complete the rest of this course?