I understand this lesson but I dont understand how the last example is a comparative sentence at all. In previous lessons the teacher mentioned that, implied or not, there are two things being compared. If the last example says "Tom's recipe for lasagna is easy to follow", I understand how that is absolute but I do not understand how its comparative sentence. There isn't even an implied "than" in that sentence. So, I am having a hard time thinking of an absolute example for comparative sentences. Are not all comparative sentences relative? As it is being compared to another thing (hence the "than" or implied "than")?
Hello, can someone please help me understand for the example of "Tom's recipe for lasagna..." why there is an option that it could be "...harder than most other recipes"?? I dont understand how that is stated/implied in the comparative. Thank you
It seems to me that relative claims could provide support for an absolute claim.
For example, if you said said, "tom is taller than athena, bob, and john" than to me it makes it more likely that tom is tall and therefore provides weak support for the claim that Tom is tall.
Taking this to the extreme, if you listed out, "tom is taller than x" replacing x with every person in the united states, than it would be very likely that Tom is tall and it would provide strong support for the absolute claim that Tom is tall.
I'm confused about what makes a claim absolute vs relative. What is the difference between the first example- "Tom is taller than Athena", and the last example "Tom's recipe for lasagna is easy to follow for some people.". What about that last example makes it absolute?
@3:06 in the video, can someone explain how this statement could imply that Tom's recipe is harder to follow than most other recipes? Is it because the lack of context surrounding "most" recipes?
People tend to be less objective regarding a subject about which they possess extensive knowledge than regarding a subject about which they do not possess extensive knowledge.
My brain went to the following splits:
People are equally as objective
OR
People are more objective about a subject which they do not possess extensive knowledge.
I feel like it is wrong but I don't understand why it would be or why it wasn't the first thing said
#feedback For those who are confused, this video does not do a good job of explaining the basics of relative vs. absolute. I was so confused, so I did some Google searches and asked ChatGBT, and it gave me better background information/breakdown. I then came back to this video, and it made more sense.
After reading the replies below, my understanding is that, in a nutshell, you cannot derive absolute claims from relative statements, nor relative statements from absolute claims. Am I on the right track?
#feedback I think my initial confusion might have started, in part, due to how the diagrams for both relative and absolute statements seem almost identical unless you look at them individually.
I am confused about the relative comparative. The first example: Tom is taller than Athena. Can't this be assumed that Tom is taller as the sentence explicitly says that. We can still infer that Tom is taller regardless if Tom and Athena are both tall or short.
I don't understand how for "People tend to be less objective regarding a subject about which they possess extensive knowledge than regarding a subject about which they do not possess extensive knowledge" there is the possibility that people are objective about both. Isn't it explicitly saying that there tends to be less objectivity when you know more about a subject than when you don't know as much??
After watching the video, I am still confused on the difference between a relative comparative claim and an absolute comparative claim. Can someone please clarify the difference? #feedback
It's possible i'm confused, but "absolute comparisons" don't seem to be comparisons at all. The example used about Tom's lasagna recipe doesn't compare his recipe to anything. It seems like all comparisons are relative, by their nature of examining one thing in the context of another.
People tend to be less objective regarding a subject about which they possess extensive knowledge than regarding a subject about which they do not possess extensive knowledge.
compares:
A subject one has extensive knowledge vs. a subject one do not possess extensive knowledge
Quality:
Objectivity about the subject
"Winner":
a subject one do not possess extensive knowledge
This is relative. The above claim does not suggest context about any absolute objectivity on subjects.
Tom's recipe is easy to follow for most people. → Provides no context for other recipes → absolute claims.
#HELP I am confused on what defines an absolute statement! Could someone please simplify it for me?
0
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.
68 comments
Tom's recipe is easy to follow for most people ; Tom's recipe is easy to follow for the majority of people (<50%) as opposed to the minority of people
A- Identify the entities being compared: majority of people vs non-majority of people.
B- Identify the thing being compared on: the easiness of Tom's recipe to follow for people
C- Identify the winner: Most people can follow Tom's recipe
I understand this lesson but I dont understand how the last example is a comparative sentence at all. In previous lessons the teacher mentioned that, implied or not, there are two things being compared. If the last example says "Tom's recipe for lasagna is easy to follow", I understand how that is absolute but I do not understand how its comparative sentence. There isn't even an implied "than" in that sentence. So, I am having a hard time thinking of an absolute example for comparative sentences. Are not all comparative sentences relative? As it is being compared to another thing (hence the "than" or implied "than")?
is there a formula for these? im lost
Hello, can someone please help me understand for the example of "Tom's recipe for lasagna..." why there is an option that it could be "...harder than most other recipes"?? I dont understand how that is stated/implied in the comparative. Thank you
If something is X, only because of its relation to something else, then it's relative.
If something is X, regardless of anything else then it's absolute.
This explanation is kind of confusing, here is an easier way to look at it:
If something is X, only because of its relation to something else, then it's relative.
If something is X, regardless of anything else then it's absolute.
It seems to me that relative claims could provide support for an absolute claim.
For example, if you said said, "tom is taller than athena, bob, and john" than to me it makes it more likely that tom is tall and therefore provides weak support for the claim that Tom is tall.
Taking this to the extreme, if you listed out, "tom is taller than x" replacing x with every person in the united states, than it would be very likely that Tom is tall and it would provide strong support for the absolute claim that Tom is tall.
I'm confused about what makes a claim absolute vs relative. What is the difference between the first example- "Tom is taller than Athena", and the last example "Tom's recipe for lasagna is easy to follow for some people.". What about that last example makes it absolute?
@3:06 in the video, can someone explain how this statement could imply that Tom's recipe is harder to follow than most other recipes? Is it because the lack of context surrounding "most" recipes?
I need help understanding this:
People tend to be less objective regarding a subject about which they possess extensive knowledge than regarding a subject about which they do not possess extensive knowledge.
My brain went to the following splits:
People are equally as objective
OR
People are more objective about a subject which they do not possess extensive knowledge.
I feel like it is wrong but I don't understand why it would be or why it wasn't the first thing said
We're taking the hobbits to Isengard!!!
Bro... hobbits are always short. Get your facts straight.
#feedback For those who are confused, this video does not do a good job of explaining the basics of relative vs. absolute. I was so confused, so I did some Google searches and asked ChatGBT, and it gave me better background information/breakdown. I then came back to this video, and it made more sense.
After reading the replies below, my understanding is that, in a nutshell, you cannot derive absolute claims from relative statements, nor relative statements from absolute claims. Am I on the right track?
#feedback I think my initial confusion might have started, in part, due to how the diagrams for both relative and absolute statements seem almost identical unless you look at them individually.
I am confused about the relative comparative. The first example: Tom is taller than Athena. Can't this be assumed that Tom is taller as the sentence explicitly says that. We can still infer that Tom is taller regardless if Tom and Athena are both tall or short.
so does that mean that absolute claims need no inference ? is that how we can tell them apart?
or maybe tom is tall and athena isn't...?
I don't understand how for "People tend to be less objective regarding a subject about which they possess extensive knowledge than regarding a subject about which they do not possess extensive knowledge" there is the possibility that people are objective about both. Isn't it explicitly saying that there tends to be less objectivity when you know more about a subject than when you don't know as much??
After watching the video, I am still confused on the difference between a relative comparative claim and an absolute comparative claim. Can someone please clarify the difference? #feedback
If the text explicitly says Tom’s recipe is easier to follow, why COULD IT BE harder?
It's possible i'm confused, but "absolute comparisons" don't seem to be comparisons at all. The example used about Tom's lasagna recipe doesn't compare his recipe to anything. It seems like all comparisons are relative, by their nature of examining one thing in the context of another.
People tend to be less objective regarding a subject about which they possess extensive knowledge than regarding a subject about which they do not possess extensive knowledge.
compares:
A subject one has extensive knowledge vs. a subject one do not possess extensive knowledge
Quality:
Objectivity about the subject
"Winner":
a subject one do not possess extensive knowledge
This is relative. The above claim does not suggest context about any absolute objectivity on subjects.
Tom's recipe is easy to follow for most people. → Provides no context for other recipes → absolute claims.
#help Can someone PLZ explain the absolute claim example to me? I'm struggling :')
This is a seriously lousy way of presenting this topic. We are essentially talking about superlatives..
#feedback
#HELP I am confused on what defines an absolute statement! Could someone please simplify it for me?