Its relative because Tom is only taller than Athena he can still be considered short. Saying "Tom is tall" is saying he is tall and not short. I had to play this lesson twice to fully understand this one.
Relative claims compare without making absolute statements. Absolute claims make standalone statements without comparisons. The LSAT traps you by converting one into the other.
I'm confused for the objective example, how can we say that it is possible for them to be not objective at all when we are using language like "less" and "more?"
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.
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!
Hold on there, you need to slow down.
We love that you want post in our discussion forum! Just come back in a bit to post again!
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.
81 comments
Relative: Most people find that the Chloe Paddington is bulkier than some other luxury bags.
Absolute: Parmigiano Reggiano has a greater amount and higher-quality protein than any other cheese on the planet.
im so confused on the difference between relative and absolute. what are the basic definitions?
Yikes
This was not a good way to explain it but the show goes on
Tom is tall - Absolute
Tom is taller than Athena-Relative
Its relative because Tom is only taller than Athena he can still be considered short. Saying "Tom is tall" is saying he is tall and not short. I had to play this lesson twice to fully understand this one.
I asked CHATGPT to explain this:
"Tom’s recipe for lasagna is easy to follow for most people."
this sentence is about people, not about other recipes.
It means:
More than half of people find Tom’s recipe easy to follow.
Now look at the second sentence:
This is a comparison among recipes,
not people.The two classic LSAT mistakes
Mistake 1: Turning relative into absolute
“X is better than Y” → “X is good”
Mistake 2: Turning absolute into relative
“X is easy” → “X is easier than others”
Relative claims compare without making absolute statements. Absolute claims make standalone statements without comparisons. The LSAT traps you by converting one into the other.
I thought these lessons were going to help me understand the lsat ...but I feel way less prepared than when I was reading the lsat textbook lol fml
i'm tired
I'm confused for the objective example, how can we say that it is possible for them to be not objective at all when we are using language like "less" and "more?"
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.