I understand why (D) better describes the purpose of the study, but one of the criteria for purpose of context questions is that correct answer choices also capture the author’s main motivation in writing the passage. For this passage, part of the author's main point was to argue that more empirical research is needed. Can someone explain how (D) addresses the main point?
I'm confused because in the module "Purpose of Paragraph and Purpose in Context Questions," it says "Here’s what the correct answer to a Purpose in Context question must meet: Captures the author’s main motivation in writing the phrase or sentence; and Accurately describe something the author does in connection with the phrase or sentence...There are two common traps in tempting wrong answers for Purpose of Paragraph and Purpose in Context questions. Some answers accurately describe something that happens in the part of the passage we’re asked about, but don’t capture the author’s motivation..." Could you clarify?
@kiazcmuleta459 Part of the main point is that the communications specialists are incorrect in assuming imported production dominance; therefore, evidence contradicting their claims directly supports this point.
I did this on my own first, before listening to the paragraph breakdown, and truly had NO IDEA why the second paragraph was there despite rereading it twice and reading again after I finished the passage. So later on, I skipped question 17, then came back to it and picked B just because I still had no idea why this random study was suddenly being discussed. Now it seems soooo obvious.
This was the first time I truly had comprehension issues with a paragraph of a passage. I'd be fascinated to hear what high-scorers do in the event of a comprehension issue like this.
Looking at how B and E are incorrect, is it fair to rule out an answer because chronologically it doesn't make sense? Like, if you think about what B is saying, the second paragraph could serve as preemptive support for one of the later recommendations (new ways of conducting research), looking at the entire passage holistically. Similarly, E could be describing how the study in the second paragraph 'takes into account individual viewing habits' serving as support for/an example of what is later fleshed out by Question 2.
I understand why D is correct, but should we always interpret purpose in context questions by assessing their purpose specifically at that point of the passage, or are some of them to be viewed retrospectively/overall role? hope that makes sense #help
This is hard to answer, because I don't see a distinction between the purpose at a particular point vs. the purpose when viewed retrospectively.
If we're asked why the author mentioned something, it's likely that the purpose is connected to something that happened immediately before or immediately after. But in theory the purpose could be related to something much further away. For example:
Carrots are orange.
Beets are purple.
Spinach is green.
Peppers can be yellow.
[and it keeps going like this for a long time]
So, vegetables can be many different colors.
Here, the purpose of "carrots are orange" is to support the conclusion in the very last sentence. And, chronologically, as you experience reading the set of statements, you wouldn't know the purpose of "Carrots are orange" until you get to the last sentence. So, there isn't a detectable purpose at the point in time you finish reading the first sentence.
However, consider this (not designed to be exactly analogous to the passage, but similar in key respects):
Some scholars think vegetables are only green.
But they're wrong.
Personal experience proves this. I just bought a carrot from a grocery store and can see that it's obviously orange.
Since these scholars' view concerning the range of vegetable colors is clearly wrong, scholars should do research to understand the full range of vegetable colors.
These scholars should start by understanding how vegetables come to possess different colors to better understand the full range of potential colors possible in a vegetable.
Then they should go to their local grocery stores and catalog the different colors of the vegetables available there.
What's the purpose of the line "I just bought a carrot from a grocery store and can see that it's obviously orange." It's offered as support for "But [the scholars] are wrong." We naturally expect the author to provide evidence to support the claim that other people are wrong, and that's what the author does.
Could you say that the purpose of the line is to provide an example of the kind of approach that scholars should take to researching vegetable color? No, because the author's intention was connected to showing that the scholars were wrong. And, the author didn't say anything else that suggests they wanted the reader to connect the line about carrots to the grocery store point at the end.
Now, we can say that the line describes an approach that the author recommends the scholars take -- but that's different from saying that the author's purpose in providing that line was to give an example of an approach that the scholars should take. Does this distinction make sense?
The purpose would be different different if the author later said something like, "Then the scholars should do what I did, or something similar -- engage in real world observation to catalog vegetable colors." This language would suggest the purpose of the "carrots are orange" line was both to show that the scholars were wrong and to give an example of a kind of activity the author recommends the scholars do.
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.
11 comments
different portion of passage description is very tempting under timed conditions
brooo i was stuck between d and e, I was super confident in d but still went with e :(
I understand why (D) better describes the purpose of the study, but one of the criteria for purpose of context questions is that correct answer choices also capture the author’s main motivation in writing the passage. For this passage, part of the author's main point was to argue that more empirical research is needed. Can someone explain how (D) addresses the main point?
I'm confused because in the module "Purpose of Paragraph and Purpose in Context Questions," it says "Here’s what the correct answer to a Purpose in Context question must meet: Captures the author’s main motivation in writing the phrase or sentence; and Accurately describe something the author does in connection with the phrase or sentence...There are two common traps in tempting wrong answers for Purpose of Paragraph and Purpose in Context questions. Some answers accurately describe something that happens in the part of the passage we’re asked about, but don’t capture the author’s motivation..." Could you clarify?
@kiazcmuleta459 Part of the main point is that the communications specialists are incorrect in assuming imported production dominance; therefore, evidence contradicting their claims directly supports this point.
Majoring in communciations is finally paying off lollllll. For the first time, a complicated RC passage makes complete sense
I did this on my own first, before listening to the paragraph breakdown, and truly had NO IDEA why the second paragraph was there despite rereading it twice and reading again after I finished the passage. So later on, I skipped question 17, then came back to it and picked B just because I still had no idea why this random study was suddenly being discussed. Now it seems soooo obvious.
This was the first time I truly had comprehension issues with a paragraph of a passage. I'd be fascinated to hear what high-scorers do in the event of a comprehension issue like this.
Looking at how B and E are incorrect, is it fair to rule out an answer because chronologically it doesn't make sense? Like, if you think about what B is saying, the second paragraph could serve as preemptive support for one of the later recommendations (new ways of conducting research), looking at the entire passage holistically. Similarly, E could be describing how the study in the second paragraph 'takes into account individual viewing habits' serving as support for/an example of what is later fleshed out by Question 2.
I understand why D is correct, but should we always interpret purpose in context questions by assessing their purpose specifically at that point of the passage, or are some of them to be viewed retrospectively/overall role? hope that makes sense #help
Got it correct, but wondering the same thing. Went with my gut.
This is hard to answer, because I don't see a distinction between the purpose at a particular point vs. the purpose when viewed retrospectively.
If we're asked why the author mentioned something, it's likely that the purpose is connected to something that happened immediately before or immediately after. But in theory the purpose could be related to something much further away. For example:
Carrots are orange.
Beets are purple.
Spinach is green.
Peppers can be yellow.
[and it keeps going like this for a long time]
So, vegetables can be many different colors.
Here, the purpose of "carrots are orange" is to support the conclusion in the very last sentence. And, chronologically, as you experience reading the set of statements, you wouldn't know the purpose of "Carrots are orange" until you get to the last sentence. So, there isn't a detectable purpose at the point in time you finish reading the first sentence.
However, consider this (not designed to be exactly analogous to the passage, but similar in key respects):
Some scholars think vegetables are only green.
But they're wrong.
Personal experience proves this. I just bought a carrot from a grocery store and can see that it's obviously orange.
Since these scholars' view concerning the range of vegetable colors is clearly wrong, scholars should do research to understand the full range of vegetable colors.
These scholars should start by understanding how vegetables come to possess different colors to better understand the full range of potential colors possible in a vegetable.
Then they should go to their local grocery stores and catalog the different colors of the vegetables available there.
What's the purpose of the line "I just bought a carrot from a grocery store and can see that it's obviously orange." It's offered as support for "But [the scholars] are wrong." We naturally expect the author to provide evidence to support the claim that other people are wrong, and that's what the author does.
Could you say that the purpose of the line is to provide an example of the kind of approach that scholars should take to researching vegetable color? No, because the author's intention was connected to showing that the scholars were wrong. And, the author didn't say anything else that suggests they wanted the reader to connect the line about carrots to the grocery store point at the end.
Now, we can say that the line describes an approach that the author recommends the scholars take -- but that's different from saying that the author's purpose in providing that line was to give an example of an approach that the scholars should take. Does this distinction make sense?
The purpose would be different different if the author later said something like, "Then the scholars should do what I did, or something similar -- engage in real world observation to catalog vegetable colors." This language would suggest the purpose of the "carrots are orange" line was both to show that the scholars were wrong and to give an example of a kind of activity the author recommends the scholars do.
Just responded below -- let me know what you think!