for the "People should feel no more responsible for economic disaster than for military invasions."
Why is it it either, people should feel just as responsible for both, or people should feel more responsible for military invasions and not equal to or less instead of more?
would it be wrong to say that the subject is just less likely, or does it always have to be that the opposite of the subject is more likely (or equal) For example, for the perfect pitch, one could you say that people with perfect pitch are less likely to take their children to get musical training or does it have to be people with non-perfect pitch are more likely
under. " lets review section", when it says there may not be a clear winner, is that saying that it could either be A being equal to b, but B also possibly being more but not a scenario where one is the clear winner.
Something to think about with negative comparatives that will help is to understand the theory behind negative comparatives. Why would an author of a passage or paragraph not just use a simple comparative statement without a negation? Well, it is most likely due to the context. Maybe we expect the comparative statement go a certain way so therefore, we can better see the authors emphasis on how it does not go a certain way by inserting the word "not." For example, take the last example above. We would expect that people with perfect pitch would more likely ensure their kids to receive musical training as compared to people without perfect pitch. The author uses the word not to say, "hey whatever you may have assumed, it is not the case."
Take the first example: Tom is not taller than Athena.
Maybe we are given a bunch of information of how Tom is stronger than Athena, Tom is better at basketball than Athena, Tom has taller parents than Athena, and so on... But, rather then the author just saying the reverse without an emphasis "Athena is taller than Tom," what the author can do is say "hey look you know that Tom has all these qualities that are more than Athena, but guess what? Tom is not taller than Athena!"
Just a couple things to think about.
33
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.
19 comments
for the "People should feel no more responsible for economic disaster than for military invasions."
Why is it it either, people should feel just as responsible for both, or people should feel more responsible for military invasions and not equal to or less instead of more?
am I making any sense?
Is there ever a time in comparatives when B could come before A?
This cleared up exactly what I was struggling with on the drills. I'm really enjoying the foundation portion of the study guide.
For example 2, I landed on to equally reasonable possibilities.
People should feel just as responsible for both.
People should feel less responsible for economic disasters.
Is the second bullet wrong or does it mean the same as "People should feel more responsible for military invasions?"
Does not more likely = less likely or neutral in this case?
helpful formula for quickly making sense of negative comparatives
would it be wrong to say that the subject is just less likely, or does it always have to be that the opposite of the subject is more likely (or equal) For example, for the perfect pitch, one could you say that people with perfect pitch are less likely to take their children to get musical training or does it have to be people with non-perfect pitch are more likely
Would it be fair to use "Negate Necessary" translations with these statements?
under. " lets review section", when it says there may not be a clear winner, is that saying that it could either be A being equal to b, but B also possibly being more but not a scenario where one is the clear winner.
Noticing that the "winner" tends to be towards the end of the clause, or "B"
Is this the norm?
#help (Added by Admin)
Something to think about with negative comparatives that will help is to understand the theory behind negative comparatives. Why would an author of a passage or paragraph not just use a simple comparative statement without a negation? Well, it is most likely due to the context. Maybe we expect the comparative statement go a certain way so therefore, we can better see the authors emphasis on how it does not go a certain way by inserting the word "not." For example, take the last example above. We would expect that people with perfect pitch would more likely ensure their kids to receive musical training as compared to people without perfect pitch. The author uses the word not to say, "hey whatever you may have assumed, it is not the case."
Take the first example: Tom is not taller than Athena.
Maybe we are given a bunch of information of how Tom is stronger than Athena, Tom is better at basketball than Athena, Tom has taller parents than Athena, and so on... But, rather then the author just saying the reverse without an emphasis "Athena is taller than Tom," what the author can do is say "hey look you know that Tom has all these qualities that are more than Athena, but guess what? Tom is not taller than Athena!"
Just a couple things to think about.