What got me on this question was not my conditional thinking, but literally the language of the answer choices. I need a module on how to read and pick apart the language that the LSAT makers use to make answer choices difficult/more(or less) appealing.
I got it right but I don't find myself using even most of the rules we're learning. Any pressure makes those go out the window for me and just rely on my base instincts and lawgic
@NathanielWright I feel this too. to help ive had to purposely slow myself down and be like ok what steps do I need to take. I think it's one of those things if you can nail it down while going slow it will help you go faster later. hope this helps
@NathanielWright same here, I did jot down some lawgic diagramming but never thought of doing De Morgan's Law or Conj or disjunctions instead wrote the flow and took a contrapositive and started looking for an answer, which one suits the best not to buy and started with "A"..."E" that caught my eye w/out any hesitation. Eventually, I think we need to get into these kinds of PT Qs to fasten the processing of diagramming and figuring out the answer in our head to beat the clock and score well. All-in-all I am feeling that practicing makes these questions perfectly answerable in the PTs and Official test. Thanks!
@NathanielWright I totally agree. I tried to understand the conditional relationships in my mind and then selected the answer instinctively. I was right this time. However, I think it's good to at least look for the indicators and break down the stimulus into lawgic to avoid the notorious LSAT traps!
I didn't use DeMorgan's law and still got the answer right. I just read the stimulus very carefully. I diagrammed a more simplified version of yours and still understood the right answer. I slowed down when it came to the answer choices to make sure I wasn't missing anything.
I got it right and didn't do too bad with time, but I did basically forget everything from this module lol. I just scribbled symbols that made sense to me that were essentially renditions of all of the rules we have learned so maybe it might be beneficial to really make the rules your own and manipulate them so they make the most sense to you
@Mycatwenttoclawschool that's how I felt with the skill builder questions, which I did horrendously on; just keep trying the questions, if you need to, go back and re-read the explanations for each case, and (I know they advised against this), do your best to keep the key words to memory (a.k.a., "only if" being a group 2)
I chose the correct answer within a minute and then spent 4 MINUTES triple checking i was actually right. :/ I'm not sure how to stop second guessing myself.
I got it wrong the first time because I didn’t understand what principle and application mean. But got it right on blind review once took some time to understand the question.
Went with C the first time around and for the Blind Review answer correct. I am not a diagram person, all of that just confuses me a little. Like sometime I get it and other times I be completely lost.
These upset me because i rush and cant ever stop myself from rushing. IF you take the contrapositive its easy, yet i rushed, didnt graph and chose wrong. TAKE YOUR TIME...
This is my reminder that I need to slow down and question stem carefully. I diagrammed this correctly but answered opposite of what the stem was asking smh
In the video explanation, the instructor says that we can immediately disregard the "and not just for its value as an investment" part, because it's impossible to be "desirable for its intrinsic value" and "just for investment" at the same time. I get it, but when the DeMorgan's Law is applied, it's a series of negated sufficient conditions where if even just one of them is true, the necessary condition follows right? So basically we're supposed to look out for any of them.
In that case, I wonder how quickly we can eliminate one of these conditions like in the video for other questions. For example, if one of these answer options was something like "Matilde read a magazine about how the vase is gaining attention in the antique market and was only excited about that", then it ticks the "just for investment" part and will be the correct answer. So at the end of the day, isn't eliminating early on a condition in DeMorgan's Law kinda risky?
@kazuhiro35 Yes I thought the same thing. It takes a little longer, but I think its definitely safer to leave the condition in to see the fuller picture. It's worth noting though, that in earlier lessons, it teaches that language the comes after "not just" will likely not take part in the answer choices.
It also states early on that things that follow "only if" especially with a conjunction of 2 conditions are much likelier to be the contested part of the problem.
If you think about it... going down the rabbit hole of "not just" actually goes a bit off script of what we've learned up to this point, so it is wiser to focus in on the conjunction & disjunction (for the contrapositive) following the necessary condition.
@kazuhiro35 But if you recognize that she was "only excited about that," then that means she is not interested in an intrinsic quality. So we get to the same place, right?
Ultimately the issue is we care about the underlying meaning. It's not wrong to represent something in one way that accurately captures the meaning even if someone else would use less language to capture the same meaning. Neither way is right or wrong as long as the core meaning is the same.
159 comments
What got me on this question was not my conditional thinking, but literally the language of the answer choices. I need a module on how to read and pick apart the language that the LSAT makers use to make answer choices difficult/more(or less) appealing.
Man, keep getting them right but going too slow. Hope practice makes perfect
@bransonschoeneberg Same! Took me toooo long to answer this question. Hopefully we gain speed as we start doing the PTs.
I got it right but I don't find myself using even most of the rules we're learning. Any pressure makes those go out the window for me and just rely on my base instincts and lawgic
@NathanielWright I feel this too. to help ive had to purposely slow myself down and be like ok what steps do I need to take. I think it's one of those things if you can nail it down while going slow it will help you go faster later. hope this helps
@NathanielWright same here, I did jot down some lawgic diagramming but never thought of doing De Morgan's Law or Conj or disjunctions instead wrote the flow and took a contrapositive and started looking for an answer, which one suits the best not to buy and started with "A"..."E" that caught my eye w/out any hesitation. Eventually, I think we need to get into these kinds of PT Qs to fasten the processing of diagramming and figuring out the answer in our head to beat the clock and score well. All-in-all I am feeling that practicing makes these questions perfectly answerable in the PTs and Official test. Thanks!
@NathanielWright I totally agree. I tried to understand the conditional relationships in my mind and then selected the answer instinctively. I was right this time. However, I think it's good to at least look for the indicators and break down the stimulus into lawgic to avoid the notorious LSAT traps!
I didn't use DeMorgan's law and still got the answer right. I just read the stimulus very carefully. I diagrammed a more simplified version of yours and still understood the right answer. I slowed down when it came to the answer choices to make sure I wasn't missing anything.
I got it right and didn't do too bad with time, but I did basically forget everything from this module lol. I just scribbled symbols that made sense to me that were essentially renditions of all of the rules we have learned so maybe it might be beneficial to really make the rules your own and manipulate them so they make the most sense to you
First time getting a You Try right on the first try, tears of joy HAHAHA PROGRESS!
@Nampoina same and I was stressing this whole lesson because I was SO lost lol
@Nampoina LETS GOOOOOOO, this is only the first two weeks too. Wait till we are a couple months in!!!!
I didn't realize/ understand we should have ignored the part of the principle about the value of the piece as an investment.
Don't forget to use the highlight tool to help remember the necessary conditions! Helped me answer the question under the time limit 😁
@ArdenAmarelo I had completely forgotten about those. Thanks for the reminder.
anyone else feeling incredibly low after these try it yourself qustions?
E was my second choice and this isnt the first time. Just feeling very down after some of these.
@Mycatwenttoclawschool that's how I felt with the skill builder questions, which I did horrendously on; just keep trying the questions, if you need to, go back and re-read the explanations for each case, and (I know they advised against this), do your best to keep the key words to memory (a.k.a., "only if" being a group 2)
I chose the correct answer within a minute and then spent 4 MINUTES triple checking i was actually right. :/ I'm not sure how to stop second guessing myself.
@Sab0613 this is so me
I got it right, way over time but who cares rn!!!!!!!! :-p
Literally jumped for joy when I got this right. Haha!
I'm so beyond happy I understood this
I got it right, but it took me 7 Minutes.
i laughed so hard pls
I got it right, it took me 5 minutes lol
took me 40 seconds
why would you say that I'm cacklinggggg
reimu pfp goes hard
I got it wrong the first time because I didn’t understand what principle and application mean. But got it right on blind review once took some time to understand the question.
dang this question took me 1 HOUR and I got it wrong!!!! what will I do!!!
i read it as SHOULD and not should not omg
same
GOT IT! but it took 5 minutes...im just so dang slow
Went with C the first time around and for the Blind Review answer correct. I am not a diagram person, all of that just confuses me a little. Like sometime I get it and other times I be completely lost.
These upset me because i rush and cant ever stop myself from rushing. IF you take the contrapositive its easy, yet i rushed, didnt graph and chose wrong. TAKE YOUR TIME...
@Gabero123 Ignore the clock! It doesn't matter how long things are taking you right now. Treat these questions as untimed.
This is my reminder that I need to slow down and question stem carefully. I diagrammed this correctly but answered opposite of what the stem was asking smh
@CaldonJones Same
got it 50 seconds below the target time :), I think im finally getting the hang of it
What tripped me up was forgetting to switch "and" for "or"... That definitely led me into a trap and caused me to miss the correct choice.
In the video explanation, the instructor says that we can immediately disregard the "and not just for its value as an investment" part, because it's impossible to be "desirable for its intrinsic value" and "just for investment" at the same time. I get it, but when the DeMorgan's Law is applied, it's a series of negated sufficient conditions where if even just one of them is true, the necessary condition follows right? So basically we're supposed to look out for any of them.
In that case, I wonder how quickly we can eliminate one of these conditions like in the video for other questions. For example, if one of these answer options was something like "Matilde read a magazine about how the vase is gaining attention in the antique market and was only excited about that", then it ticks the "just for investment" part and will be the correct answer. So at the end of the day, isn't eliminating early on a condition in DeMorgan's Law kinda risky?
@kazuhiro35 Yes I thought the same thing. It takes a little longer, but I think its definitely safer to leave the condition in to see the fuller picture. It's worth noting though, that in earlier lessons, it teaches that language the comes after "not just" will likely not take part in the answer choices.
It also states early on that things that follow "only if" especially with a conjunction of 2 conditions are much likelier to be the contested part of the problem.
If you think about it... going down the rabbit hole of "not just" actually goes a bit off script of what we've learned up to this point, so it is wiser to focus in on the conjunction & disjunction (for the contrapositive) following the necessary condition.
edit: I made the same mistake
@kazuhiro35 But if you recognize that she was "only excited about that," then that means she is not interested in an intrinsic quality. So we get to the same place, right?
Ultimately the issue is we care about the underlying meaning. It's not wrong to represent something in one way that accurately captures the meaning even if someone else would use less language to capture the same meaning. Neither way is right or wrong as long as the core meaning is the same.