What can be so disorienting about LSAT stimuli is the way statements just plop out of nowhere but would make sense in another context. It helps me to create a little fake context to actually comprehend statements. Like #5 is hard to understand at first glance as a comparative but would make sense, naturally, in a news articles about an energy company asking customers to cut back on heating usage during a major winter storm, like.. "After ERCOT's urging of customers to turn down thermostats to avoid power grid overload....."
things being compared: normal weather days vs very cold days
quality: maintain a lower indoor temperature
winner: normal days
i took it to mean that 59% of households maintained a lower indoor temp on normal weather days versus very cold days. i feel like i was so close, but i think the missing link was accustomed.
@rosenb1um Big thing is don't let the "small" and "large" comparison be the factor. The question could be "Over consistent research the chance of heart failure in Tall people is more consistent that of shorter people. Tall people are the "winner" though the answer isn't a winning side its more just the fact of the group of people with the highest chance of heart a heart failure would be Tall people.
“Accustomed to maintain” is habit-language. Habits are usually compared within the same situation unless the sentence tells you the situation changed. Pair that with “on very cold days,” and it strongly suggests: when it’s very cold, they used to keep it at X, now they keep it at Y, and Y is lower.
Grammatically, “on very cold days” lives inside the comparison clause (“accustomed to maintain”), not inside the main clause (“maintained a lower temperature”). So, strictly speaking, the sentence explicitly tells you the baseline is “what they were accustomed to on very cold days” (vs what they were not accustomed to on very cold days).
@AlyssaInvernizzi what helped me understand why I answered this incorrectly is to imagine the comparative in this question like it's from a news report about household energy usage during a cold snap. The lines immediately preceding the sentence would establish that the newscaster is comparing the indoor temps that people were accustomed to, versus indoor temps now.
That at least helped me see where I went wrong interpreting the question.
@dancingqueen138 yeah I thought the same because it would be obvious that cold days would mean the home would be colder than what were used to so the comparison would have to be cold to extremely cold.
I don't understand how we could be comparing "accustomed to" and "now" when the verb maintained is in a simple past form. Without more context, we can be comparing recent events but nothing indicates current events.
Okay so I got #5 wrong when I answered it on my own. Here's my attempt to understand it after watching the video.
At least 59 percent of households [this is what "they" refers to] maintained a lower indoor temperature [in the present/now] than they [the 59 percent of households] had been accustomed to maintain [at some time in the past/not now] on very cold days [context for when the comparison applies].
I think what is confusing about this sentence is the fact that we are comparing two points in time which are ambiguous. Let's replace the temporal components with specific moments in time and all of a sudden it becomes much more clear what is happening.
At least 59 percent of households maintained a lower indoor temperature in the past three weeks than they had been accustomed to maintain in the three weeks prior on very cold days.
2. Maintaining a lower indoor temperature than accustomed to on a very cold day,
3. Most households.
I read through a bit of the discussion and it kinda seems like I'm the only one that didn't opt to compare their comfort, and I definitely did not realize that it was a comparison of accustomed to versus now. In hindsight it makes sense, but I seriously thought I was cooking. I think the percentage of households slipped me up, which I realize was probably the intention of writing it like that.
I got the others ones correct though, so not a total loss. I'm still working on understanding the more vague and abstract ways of writing these questions. I feel like number 5 was a good example of how abstract it could be, so its good practice.
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.
152 comments
What can be so disorienting about LSAT stimuli is the way statements just plop out of nowhere but would make sense in another context. It helps me to create a little fake context to actually comprehend statements. Like #5 is hard to understand at first glance as a comparative but would make sense, naturally, in a news articles about an energy company asking customers to cut back on heating usage during a major winter storm, like.. "After ERCOT's urging of customers to turn down thermostats to avoid power grid overload....."
for #5, i did:
things being compared: normal weather days vs very cold days
quality: maintain a lower indoor temperature
winner: normal days
i took it to mean that 59% of households maintained a lower indoor temp on normal weather days versus very cold days. i feel like i was so close, but i think the missing link was accustomed.
things being compared: 59% v. 41%
Is this wrong?
basically 5/5. i got the gist of #5, but i said "accustomed vs. actual" instead, with "actual temperature" being the winner
another way i thought of this question was expectation vs. reality
3/5. Confused the winner on 4, and I didn't have a standing chance against 5 lol
@rosenb1um Big thing is don't let the "small" and "large" comparison be the factor. The question could be "Over consistent research the chance of heart failure in Tall people is more consistent that of shorter people. Tall people are the "winner" though the answer isn't a winning side its more just the fact of the group of people with the highest chance of heart a heart failure would be Tall people.
Gonna take 5 after number 5
“Accustomed to maintain” is habit-language. Habits are usually compared within the same situation unless the sentence tells you the situation changed. Pair that with “on very cold days,” and it strongly suggests: when it’s very cold, they used to keep it at X, now they keep it at Y, and Y is lower.
Grammatically, “on very cold days” lives inside the comparison clause (“accustomed to maintain”), not inside the main clause (“maintained a lower temperature”). So, strictly speaking, the sentence explicitly tells you the baseline is “what they were accustomed to on very cold days” (vs what they were not accustomed to on very cold days).
@devientmelody Good to know, thank you
I got all correct, except for the "winner" answer to #5.
I only struggled on question five. I don't understand how indoor temperature tied in if it was accustomed to vs now.
#5 killed my family members
Can someone please help me with #5? After reading and watching the video explanation, I am still confused.
@AlyssaInvernizzi what helped me understand why I answered this incorrectly is to imagine the comparative in this question like it's from a news report about household energy usage during a cold snap. The lines immediately preceding the sentence would establish that the newscaster is comparing the indoor temps that people were accustomed to, versus indoor temps now.
That at least helped me see where I went wrong interpreting the question.
for some reason for 5, i wanted to compare very cold days to just regular cold days....could that still work?
@dancingqueen138 yeah I thought the same because it would be obvious that cold days would mean the home would be colder than what were used to so the comparison would have to be cold to extremely cold.
#5 is lowkey diabolical if u got that ur done
@jamandaa lollll
this made my brain hurt
Number 5 confuses me
@sapalmeri Same
@SamanthaFinjap Same, I really wanted to compare very cold days to not very cold days
I don't understand how we could be comparing "accustomed to" and "now" when the verb maintained is in a simple past form. Without more context, we can be comparing recent events but nothing indicates current events.
can someone please explain Question 5...
last one hurt my head bro
Okay so I got #5 wrong when I answered it on my own. Here's my attempt to understand it after watching the video.
At least 59 percent of households [this is what "they" refers to] maintained a lower indoor temperature [in the present/now] than they [the 59 percent of households] had been accustomed to maintain [at some time in the past/not now] on very cold days [context for when the comparison applies].
I think what is confusing about this sentence is the fact that we are comparing two points in time which are ambiguous. Let's replace the temporal components with specific moments in time and all of a sudden it becomes much more clear what is happening.
At least 59 percent of households maintained a lower indoor temperature in the past three weeks than they had been accustomed to maintain in the three weeks prior on very cold days.
Make more sense?
@HenryLehmann Great break down!
@ArmaniHunter05 Thanks for the clarification!
Can someone breakdown #5 for me? I'm beyond confused...
5th one violates Genva convention.
For question 5 I put:
1. Most households versus some households,
2. Maintaining a lower indoor temperature than accustomed to on a very cold day,
3. Most households.
I read through a bit of the discussion and it kinda seems like I'm the only one that didn't opt to compare their comfort, and I definitely did not realize that it was a comparison of accustomed to versus now. In hindsight it makes sense, but I seriously thought I was cooking. I think the percentage of households slipped me up, which I realize was probably the intention of writing it like that.
I got the others ones correct though, so not a total loss. I'm still working on understanding the more vague and abstract ways of writing these questions. I feel like number 5 was a good example of how abstract it could be, so its good practice.
FIRST 5/5 FOR THE FIRST TIME IN FPREVER YAYAYAYAAA
the 5th one is diabolical
@SusanLeifker my brain still can't comprehend it.
@KeziaH19 For me it clicked once I focused more on "than"
For Q5, I don;t know why but I really am a bit confused with what this is saying. So I thought of another way to think of the two comparisons to be
not had been accustomed to maintain
vs
accustomed to maintain
would this be a fair way to interpret it the sentence?
@Daisy228 I had the same thought, and am wondering too.