This is now ridiculous. We were told to assume nothing and now we have to make inferrences based on "common sense"? Common sense is subjective, we cant all share the same common sense as the people making the test. Be so fr
I am late i know but it is more for myself or anyone passing through: We all feel this way.. but we have to buck up anyways because we decided we wanted to be more in life
---------------------------------------
Infer - Educated guess
i think it works best to think about it in the direction the context takes you. For the respiratory issue one, i said to myself "more likely than other types of issues" BUT the context isn't taking me in that direction. i TOTALLY pulled that from my butt. We don't know anything about other issues...just that THIS one is more likely if xyz happens.
It is saying (in simple terms) that when the concentration is above the norm for a long period, it is more likely to see respiratory issues
ok so based on the context we can guide ourselves to thinking:
well if this happens and we get more issues... then we can say COMFORTABLY...there are more respiratory issues when concentration is above the norm THAN when it is not above the norm.
WHY can we say this?
We know FOR sure there's more issues if it's above the norm. So what if we go crazy and think...what about NOT above the norm...we AREN'T saying less..we are walking a nice comfy line and saying just NOT above.
So therefore we can say...alrighty we see more reps issues THAN when it is not above.....because we already know we see more when it is above
You just have to follow the direction the context gives you. Direction is telling you south, go south.
Tom had been struggling with a chronic illness. But after the prolonged adjustment to his new medication, he started to show signs of improvement. His friend Sarah visited him and noticed a positive change in his demeanor. She excitedly shared with others, "Tom is feeling better today!"
I think it would be more strongly inferred that he is feeling better today than when he was not on the medication. This is considering the part that states "prolonged adjustment", however I could see how it could also be that he is feeling better than yesterday. Anyone care to pitch in/clarify #help
I am confused about how this is relevant to the LSAT. It feels similar to the lesson on assumptions. Often when I am doing test questions, I find myself over-assuming things, and then I will course correct and UNDER assume things about the text given. I know there are levels to what makes a "reasonable" assumption or inference, but where is that line drawn?
For example three: wouldn't the implied meaning of the sentence be "The empty lot will more likely be developed as a community center than not-a community center."? does this also work?
but how are we supposed to "imply" that cafes are busy from our own personal experience if we're supposed to not allow personal biases to affect our choices on the test?
You do not need to access your own personal experience to conclude that cafes are busier during the morning rush - it says it in the stimulus: "the cafes are always busier during the morning rush". Then, since we're dealing with the 24 hour confines of a day and hence the group of relata we're pulling from is not infinite (we're looking at specific times of day or sections of the day, not just any time in human history), you can now assume that the morning rush is being compared against the non-morning rush, and the stimulus details that the morning rush is busier than these.
Its seems to me even when comparison is implied, there are still words to key in on. For example, ending a word in -er usually shows comparison to something else. Other examples can be the words/phrases "better" and "more" / "less"
I'm curious if there are examples of comparatives that don't use clues like this that I may not be thinking of.
And inferences is where you need to pull in outside knowledge to make sure you are making the reasonable ones. If you're unlucky then that knowledge would be something unfamiliar to you.
If the concentration of air pollutants is above normal for a prolonged period, then there are many more respiratory issues.
Implication...:
There are many more respiratory issues when the concentration of air pollutants is above normal for a prolonged period of time, than when air pollutants is not above normal for a prolonged period of time.
This is very similar to conditional statements without a logical indicator. The use of a logical indicator in a conditional statement and the use of a “than” in a comparative statement is something that we can use as a translation mechanism when we are given statements that lack them.
Another important thing to remember is that we can not over infer a comparative statement when there isn’t one. A lot of wrong answers, especially on reading comp, will wrongly try to make a comparison that isn’t there. Rather, understanding a comparative statement is the first step in getting a inference question right.
Take the following example.
Michael Jordan is the best of all time in basketball.
Comparative statement: Michael Jordan is better than everyone else.
Aside: Bob Love plays basketball.
Inference: Bob Love is not as good as MJ.
Wrong inference: Michael Jordan is a better shooter/dribbler/defender then Bob Love. <—- these are inferences that are “out of scope.”
Would it be reasonable for example 3 to infer the following? The empty lot will more likely be developed as a community center than it will anything else.
@zleche I think that if that was the inference you were supposed to make, the word would be "most", instead of "more".
"Most" implies that the lot is more likely to developed as a community center than anything else. "More" implies it is more likely to be developed than something else, making the context necessary for one to be able to meaningfully infer anything.
I brain went "if the concentration of air pollutants is above normal for a prolonged period, then there are many more respiratory issues - than when the concentration of air pollutants is above normal for a short period"
For the Tom statement. I assumed that him feeling better today than a month ago. The prolonged bit, to me, sounds like before he started the meds he wasn't doing as good. So we can assume he's doing better than a month VS. yesterday. We have nothing in the passage to suggest that something happened between yesterday and today. Am I making sense or am I losing it?
Why do we have to extrapolate that cafes are busier at all times of the day in example 2? Isn't it possible (if not more reasonable to assume) that they are simply busier than a specific point in time, even without added context directing us to that conclusion?
@fishingto9 I think the interpretation is somewhat ambiguous, but it is more likely that the writer meant to imply that the morning, relative to all other points in time, was the busiest. Of course with context this statement could be referring to other points in time, but I think it's really open to interpretation, I do think it's reasonable to assume that other things might be implied
39 comments
This is now ridiculous. We were told to assume nothing and now we have to make inferrences based on "common sense"? Common sense is subjective, we cant all share the same common sense as the people making the test. Be so fr
@GDatria715 Also confused. If it requires an inference, is it to be assumed a weak argument or not true?
I am late i know but it is more for myself or anyone passing through: We all feel this way.. but we have to buck up anyways because we decided we wanted to be more in life
---------------------------------------
Infer - Educated guess
i think it works best to think about it in the direction the context takes you. For the respiratory issue one, i said to myself "more likely than other types of issues" BUT the context isn't taking me in that direction. i TOTALLY pulled that from my butt. We don't know anything about other issues...just that THIS one is more likely if xyz happens.
It is saying (in simple terms) that when the concentration is above the norm for a long period, it is more likely to see respiratory issues
ok so based on the context we can guide ourselves to thinking:
well if this happens and we get more issues... then we can say COMFORTABLY...there are more respiratory issues when concentration is above the norm THAN when it is not above the norm.
WHY can we say this?
We know FOR sure there's more issues if it's above the norm. So what if we go crazy and think...what about NOT above the norm...we AREN'T saying less..we are walking a nice comfy line and saying just NOT above.
So therefore we can say...alrighty we see more reps issues THAN when it is not above.....because we already know we see more when it is above
You just have to follow the direction the context gives you. Direction is telling you south, go south.
Hope that made any sense lol
In the first example:
Tom had been struggling with a chronic illness. But after the prolonged adjustment to his new medication, he started to show signs of improvement. His friend Sarah visited him and noticed a positive change in his demeanor. She excitedly shared with others, "Tom is feeling better today!"
I think it would be more strongly inferred that he is feeling better today than when he was not on the medication. This is considering the part that states "prolonged adjustment", however I could see how it could also be that he is feeling better than yesterday. Anyone care to pitch in/clarify #help
Good point. I made some edits. Hopefully more clear now. Thanks for the feedback!
I am confused about how this is relevant to the LSAT. It feels similar to the lesson on assumptions. Often when I am doing test questions, I find myself over-assuming things, and then I will course correct and UNDER assume things about the text given. I know there are levels to what makes a "reasonable" assumption or inference, but where is that line drawn?
@SarahLewin omg I AM SO LOST with assumptions. do we just assume ANYTHING? like what
For example three: wouldn't the implied meaning of the sentence be "The empty lot will more likely be developed as a community center than not-a community center."? does this also work?
Yeah, I interpreted this the same way, with an implied "than otherwise"
but how are we supposed to "imply" that cafes are busy from our own personal experience if we're supposed to not allow personal biases to affect our choices on the test?
You do not need to access your own personal experience to conclude that cafes are busier during the morning rush - it says it in the stimulus: "the cafes are always busier during the morning rush". Then, since we're dealing with the 24 hour confines of a day and hence the group of relata we're pulling from is not infinite (we're looking at specific times of day or sections of the day, not just any time in human history), you can now assume that the morning rush is being compared against the non-morning rush, and the stimulus details that the morning rush is busier than these.
@Tom_____________ great reasoning!
Its seems to me even when comparison is implied, there are still words to key in on. For example, ending a word in -er usually shows comparison to something else. Other examples can be the words/phrases "better" and "more" / "less"
I'm curious if there are examples of comparatives that don't use clues like this that I may not be thinking of.
@epayne17 the fact that in the past few lessons comparative adjectives and adverbs as clues have not been brought up ONCE??
The Cafes are always busier during the morning rush
Implication...:
The cafes are busier during the morning rush than the Afternoon, or night.
I think of the Marcel the Shell video - ‘compared to what?!’
"Tom is feeling better today than he was a decade ago"
"well maybe Tom had cancer a decade ago. If he doesn't have cancer anymore, then I'm sure he feels better today than when he had cancer"
-2 seconds later-
"Tom had been battling an illness"
If the concentration of air pollutants is above normal for a prolonged period, then there are many more respiratory issues.
Simple example:
If the weather is rainy, there is more traffic in the city.
It is implied that there is more traffic in the city when the weather is rainy than when the weather is not rainy.
And inferences is where you need to pull in outside knowledge to make sure you are making the reasonable ones. If you're unlucky then that knowledge would be something unfamiliar to you.
Some guys score better with the ladies when out on a boat. Whats the implication???
@danjpeach96 That some guys score worse when their out on a no-boat.
I think.
@GGG I don’t think you’re getting it. The implication is things might now go so well for them if they say no.
@GGG It’s a Always Sunny reference lol just a joke
If the concentration of air pollutants is above normal for a prolonged period, then there are many more respiratory issues.
Implication...:
There are many more respiratory issues when the concentration of air pollutants is above normal for a prolonged period of time, than when air pollutants is not above normal for a prolonged period of time.
This is very similar to conditional statements without a logical indicator. The use of a logical indicator in a conditional statement and the use of a “than” in a comparative statement is something that we can use as a translation mechanism when we are given statements that lack them.
Another important thing to remember is that we can not over infer a comparative statement when there isn’t one. A lot of wrong answers, especially on reading comp, will wrongly try to make a comparison that isn’t there. Rather, understanding a comparative statement is the first step in getting a inference question right.
Take the following example.
Michael Jordan is the best of all time in basketball.
Comparative statement: Michael Jordan is better than everyone else.
Aside: Bob Love plays basketball.
Inference: Bob Love is not as good as MJ.
Wrong inference: Michael Jordan is a better shooter/dribbler/defender then Bob Love. <—- these are inferences that are “out of scope.”
Wouldn’t your inference need to say Bob is not as good at basketball as MJ or can you imply the basketball part?
No, because we know MJ is the best, we know everyone else (Bob) is not as good.
Would it be reasonable for example 3 to infer the following? The empty lot will more likely be developed as a community center than it will anything else.
@zleche I think that if that was the inference you were supposed to make, the word would be "most", instead of "more".
"Most" implies that the lot is more likely to developed as a community center than anything else. "More" implies it is more likely to be developed than something else, making the context necessary for one to be able to meaningfully infer anything.
Very helpful!
Tyra is skinner than she was last month. She snorts a ton of coke.
@evooqueen IM DEAD I LAUGHED
I brain went "if the concentration of air pollutants is above normal for a prolonged period, then there are many more respiratory issues - than when the concentration of air pollutants is above normal for a short period"
-_-
For the Tom statement. I assumed that him feeling better today than a month ago. The prolonged bit, to me, sounds like before he started the meds he wasn't doing as good. So we can assume he's doing better than a month VS. yesterday. We have nothing in the passage to suggest that something happened between yesterday and today. Am I making sense or am I losing it?
In Example 4, do we not assume
False -> False
when this is not necessarily ture? Example goes
If the concentration of air pollutants is above normal for a prolonged period, then there are many more respiratory issues.
Consider this statement as A -> B. Then, the claimed implied comparison is
(B when A) is more likely than (B when not A).
Yes B is guaranteed when A holds, but we do not know whether B is guaranteed or not when A does not hold, and it could very well be the case.
With this in mind, rather than a strict comparison, it does feel like it leaves grounds for not having a winner.
Why do we have to extrapolate that cafes are busier at all times of the day in example 2? Isn't it possible (if not more reasonable to assume) that they are simply busier than a specific point in time, even without added context directing us to that conclusion?
@fishingto9 I think the interpretation is somewhat ambiguous, but it is more likely that the writer meant to imply that the morning, relative to all other points in time, was the busiest. Of course with context this statement could be referring to other points in time, but I think it's really open to interpretation, I do think it's reasonable to assume that other things might be implied
Dom did better in his LSAT drills today than 3 weeks ago. He was using 7Sage.
@Dom80 This wouldn't be an example of an implied comparative because you use the word "than," making this an explicit comparative.