There needs to be more lessons regarding the diffrence between causation and correlation.
While the list of indicator words was helpful, it was sparse. There were indicator words - yet they don't imply a causal relationship. There are Non-causal indicator words that imply causal relationships.
This really confused me. Nothing about indicators such as the verb "decreases" and the term "tend to" were mentioned, then used in the explanation as if it were common knowledge.
Additionally, I feel like I understood all of the lessons, but then got all of these questions wrong. For #2 and #3, I am extremely confused how we can be certain that giving children everything directly causes adults who are not able to cope, but then for number 3, we are supposed to pick out that there could have been something else that caused the food poisoning, and not sushi.
Could there not be something else that caused the adults to not be able to cope?
Edit: I think I now understand that it all boils down to language. In the second question, the term "produces" implies causation. This is missing from the third question. The word "suffered" is used to describe the food poisoning, which could have come from elsewhere. There needs to be more sections on this before a skill builder.
As others have mentioned below, this exercise was not previously taught and is a curveball. Please create a lesson that explains this concept in detail prior to this drill.
This had nothing to do with causal relationships and the hypothesis content we just learned. The first question could have been another learning section itself, discussing language and grammar identifiers.
I would recommend adding a section before this skill builder that provides an overview of how grammar might indicate a causal relationship within a statement. I now understand how such verbs are used after the exercise, but I felt like the previous sections did not prepare me for the specific instructions for this skill builder. It just created frustration.
For question #2, how am I suppose to figure out that the words "tends to" before the causal verb "produce" do not change the assertion that there is a casual relationship? Because the question before has tends to be in it. Am I suppose to assume that most of the time, a casual verb indicated a casual relationship?
On the first one, couldn't being the best at basketball make someone popular at school? like MVPs are usually very popular because being that good at basketball makes them cool
My mistake in this section was misunderstanding the instructions to ask if a causal relationship could plausibly exist. Which, of course, I can make a plausible causal chain.
But you're asking if the statement itself asserts a causal relationship. The devil is in the details.
Omg this was so helpful! I just finished the LR section and was going back through the foundations in hopes to find something about causal language. I kept struggling to recognize causal language vs conditional, and this practice set is just what I needed <3
For anyone new to this section, lookout for the words "tends to be" "usually" basically words that do not fully confirm the correlation between the cause and effect, that is what helped me in this section.
Is this a new section? I swear I finished foundations and then no things keep popping up. I mean it was good practice
1
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.
45 comments
There needs to be more lessons regarding the diffrence between causation and correlation.
While the list of indicator words was helpful, it was sparse. There were indicator words - yet they don't imply a causal relationship. There are Non-causal indicator words that imply causal relationships.
I'm fricked.
5/5!
#3 was very tricky though lol
#3 seriously? I don't care who you are, you more than likely will get that wrong. The answer makes no sense.
This really confused me. Nothing about indicators such as the verb "decreases" and the term "tend to" were mentioned, then used in the explanation as if it were common knowledge.
Additionally, I feel like I understood all of the lessons, but then got all of these questions wrong. For #2 and #3, I am extremely confused how we can be certain that giving children everything directly causes adults who are not able to cope, but then for number 3, we are supposed to pick out that there could have been something else that caused the food poisoning, and not sushi.
Could there not be something else that caused the adults to not be able to cope?
Edit: I think I now understand that it all boils down to language. In the second question, the term "produces" implies causation. This is missing from the third question. The word "suffered" is used to describe the food poisoning, which could have come from elsewhere. There needs to be more sections on this before a skill builder.
As others have mentioned below, this exercise was not previously taught and is a curveball. Please create a lesson that explains this concept in detail prior to this drill.
This had nothing to do with causal relationships and the hypothesis content we just learned. The first question could have been another learning section itself, discussing language and grammar identifiers.
This drill being focused on "causal language," yet having no section explaining this language is definitely odd.
What are some important causal words we should recognize, like "produce?"
This drill seems to be better understood at using passive vs. active voice in writing these sentences.
I would recommend adding a section before this skill builder that provides an overview of how grammar might indicate a causal relationship within a statement. I now understand how such verbs are used after the exercise, but I felt like the previous sections did not prepare me for the specific instructions for this skill builder. It just created frustration.
Umm these made me more confused. Why do I feel like these questions don't pertain to what we just learned in this module?
#help
For question #2, how am I suppose to figure out that the words "tends to" before the causal verb "produce" do not change the assertion that there is a casual relationship? Because the question before has tends to be in it. Am I suppose to assume that most of the time, a casual verb indicated a casual relationship?
#help
On the first one, couldn't being the best at basketball make someone popular at school? like MVPs are usually very popular because being that good at basketball makes them cool
My mistake in this section was misunderstanding the instructions to ask if a causal relationship could plausibly exist. Which, of course, I can make a plausible causal chain.
But you're asking if the statement itself asserts a causal relationship. The devil is in the details.
This whole thing is just very confusing. Part of me thinks that I should rely on my intuition, but the sushi example takes that all away. Very lost
Omg this was so helpful! I just finished the LR section and was going back through the foundations in hopes to find something about causal language. I kept struggling to recognize causal language vs conditional, and this practice set is just what I needed <3
For anyone new to this section, lookout for the words "tends to be" "usually" basically words that do not fully confirm the correlation between the cause and effect, that is what helped me in this section.
Is this a new section? I swear I finished foundations and then no things keep popping up. I mean it was good practice