I know Q19 was kind of skipped in the Passage A explanation (though suggested we go at it ourselves), but I think it would have been helpful to have done it anyways on the video. B) is especially difficult because it's easy to forget parts and assumptions of Passage A after reading and answering all the questions concerning Passage B. If we had already eliminated that answer, this question is a piece of cake.
I was stuck between B and C. I tried translating Passage A, lines 3-7 into casual logic to see if that would help:
Human behavior -c→ reproductive success -c→ proliferation of gene causing human behavior.
Both B and C seemed to follow the chain, but after hearing JY’s explanation, the nuance was in if Passage A is talking about all actions and all human behavior, which it is not.
Given type of human behavior -c→ reproductive success -c→ proliferation of gene causing human behavior
Given type of human behavior =/= any action
Good reminder to pay attention to words like “any,” “never,” etc.
#help Does 'in evolutionary terms' in answer choice C not reduce its accuracy? I get the issue with B, but is the author of passage B actually taking issue with explaining something 'in evolutionary terms' or is he merely suggesting there may be more to the story than the evolutionary mechs?
One thing I think is a lil dangerous about eliminating answers after reading A but before reading B is that B might regard something as a mistaken assumption that A did not actually mistakenly assume. B might be making a faulty argument!
For example, imagine A said "wow its probably so sunny outside today, as it always has been this week".
A assumes past sunny means future sunny.
And then imagine B responds "well, A forgot its currently raining!" B is saying this statement because they think A is assuming it is not raining, but it actually is. But A never said its NOT raining. Maybe A believes / agrees that its both!
I just remember an LR question about placebo vs therapeutic effect and two people disagreeing, and the answer was actually something the second arguer mistakenly thought the first was saying.
If it is true that B makes a logical argument, then yes, you can eliminate things A did not assume right off the bat. But if LSAT is trying to trip us up, there's a chance the right answer may be something B regards as mistaken even though A never even assumed it in the first place.
Read and Understand the Question Stem: "It can be inferred that the author of Passage B would regard which one of the following as a mistaken assumption underlying arguments like that made in Passage A"
→ Clarify the task: to find an assumption made in passage A, but the author of passage B thinks it should not be made.
1. Identify whether the statement in ACs has been assumed in Passage A.
→ If not an assumption made in passage A, eliminate the AC;
→ If it is an existing assumption made in passage A argument,
2. Then analyze whether the author of passage B regards this assumption as mistaken.
One of my biggest problems is not reading carefully enough. This could be reading something but not focusing on the details, or even just being too confident on an answer choice and skipping the reading of a couple of other answers.
26
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.
17 comments
this could have been done without reading passage B.
I know Q19 was kind of skipped in the Passage A explanation (though suggested we go at it ourselves), but I think it would have been helpful to have done it anyways on the video. B) is especially difficult because it's easy to forget parts and assumptions of Passage A after reading and answering all the questions concerning Passage B. If we had already eliminated that answer, this question is a piece of cake.
I dont know how i got this right but i did but these writers are testing me
SPOILERS:
SA screams at you:
"ONLY IF" huge green flag on this question.
Someone in the comments spoiled this question for me on the first pass :(
Wouldn't 60% of people choosing B just mean this is lowkey a bad question?
(just tryna cope T-T)
I was lured!!! I wish I had looked at this question during my split approach.
Sneaky LSAT writers haha
I was stuck between B and C. I tried translating Passage A, lines 3-7 into casual logic to see if that would help:
Human behavior -c→ reproductive success -c→ proliferation of gene causing human behavior.
Both B and C seemed to follow the chain, but after hearing JY’s explanation, the nuance was in if Passage A is talking about all actions and all human behavior, which it is not.
Given type of human behavior -c→ reproductive success -c→ proliferation of gene causing human behavior
Given type of human behavior =/= any action
Good reminder to pay attention to words like “any,” “never,” etc.
this is humbling
#help Does 'in evolutionary terms' in answer choice C not reduce its accuracy? I get the issue with B, but is the author of passage B actually taking issue with explaining something 'in evolutionary terms' or is he merely suggesting there may be more to the story than the evolutionary mechs?
This passage is not fun.
One thing I think is a lil dangerous about eliminating answers after reading A but before reading B is that B might regard something as a mistaken assumption that A did not actually mistakenly assume. B might be making a faulty argument!
For example, imagine A said "wow its probably so sunny outside today, as it always has been this week".
A assumes past sunny means future sunny.
And then imagine B responds "well, A forgot its currently raining!" B is saying this statement because they think A is assuming it is not raining, but it actually is. But A never said its NOT raining. Maybe A believes / agrees that its both!
I just remember an LR question about placebo vs therapeutic effect and two people disagreeing, and the answer was actually something the second arguer mistakenly thought the first was saying.
If it is true that B makes a logical argument, then yes, you can eliminate things A did not assume right off the bat. But if LSAT is trying to trip us up, there's a chance the right answer may be something B regards as mistaken even though A never even assumed it in the first place.
this passage is outrageous
Read and Understand the Question Stem: "It can be inferred that the author of Passage B would regard which one of the following as a mistaken assumption underlying arguments like that made in Passage A"
→ Clarify the task: to find an assumption made in passage A, but the author of passage B thinks it should not be made.
1. Identify whether the statement in ACs has been assumed in Passage A.
→ If not an assumption made in passage A, eliminate the AC;
→ If it is an existing assumption made in passage A argument,
2. Then analyze whether the author of passage B regards this assumption as mistaken.
One of my biggest problems is not reading carefully enough. This could be reading something but not focusing on the details, or even just being too confident on an answer choice and skipping the reading of a couple of other answers.