I tried this question out on my own before I looked at the lesson, and was stuck between B and D. Breaking down what the question stem was actually asking (purpose of the passage and not just information mentioned in the passage) was EXTREMELY helpful. I'm beginning to feel like so much on this test is coming down to learning to answer the question asked with accuracy and just the right amount precision. Everything else is a useful exercise to understand the stimulus/passage/structure/etc., but to get questions correctly, we have to answer exactly what's asked of us and nothing more.
I had easily eliminated A and E. I can see that 'objectivity' kept C for me, in rereading it I should have eliminated but D seemed like I'd be way too aggressive. Any advice for understanding when it's ok to be so aggressive or is it default always? Like will the answers always be very clearly a 'yes' if consider both passages?
#help Kevin / JY can you spell out a bit more about how you'll know if you were too aggressive? You say there's a built in error-correction-mechanism, but what does this actually look like? Do you mean that when you read passage B you'll know the answer to this particular question must have been D and not B, presumably because of some smoking gun you find in passage B which shows it to be totally unconcerned with historians avoiding bias?
And if this were the case, how would you keep the question straight in your head if you've already 'moved on' from it, confident in the overly aggressive stance?
Do you recommend flagging the question to return to if there is extra time at the end? Or should we just get returning to it completely out of our head?
dang "not coming back" threw me for a surprise lol, I would've thought we would at least glanced at it after reading the next passage.
20
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.
21 comments
D was a very aggressive elimination. I love it.
will be able to eliminate on the online version of the lsat and be able to go back to questions with eliminated answers?
split approach is wild and I'm here for it
yay got right!
I tried this question out on my own before I looked at the lesson, and was stuck between B and D. Breaking down what the question stem was actually asking (purpose of the passage and not just information mentioned in the passage) was EXTREMELY helpful. I'm beginning to feel like so much on this test is coming down to learning to answer the question asked with accuracy and just the right amount precision. Everything else is a useful exercise to understand the stimulus/passage/structure/etc., but to get questions correctly, we have to answer exactly what's asked of us and nothing more.
I can see why split approach works. i think i am understanding rc better then lr
I am liking the split approach
im so sold on the split approach
Game changing
I had easily eliminated A and E. I can see that 'objectivity' kept C for me, in rereading it I should have eliminated but D seemed like I'd be way too aggressive. Any advice for understanding when it's ok to be so aggressive or is it default always? Like will the answers always be very clearly a 'yes' if consider both passages?
#help Kevin / JY can you spell out a bit more about how you'll know if you were too aggressive? You say there's a built in error-correction-mechanism, but what does this actually look like? Do you mean that when you read passage B you'll know the answer to this particular question must have been D and not B, presumably because of some smoking gun you find in passage B which shows it to be totally unconcerned with historians avoiding bias?
And if this were the case, how would you keep the question straight in your head if you've already 'moved on' from it, confident in the overly aggressive stance?
Do you recommend flagging the question to return to if there is extra time at the end? Or should we just get returning to it completely out of our head?
dang "not coming back" threw me for a surprise lol, I would've thought we would at least glanced at it after reading the next passage.