Quick question, say if we were to get a question similar to the tiger where they say P: Tigers are dangerous animals. C: Mammals do not make good pets. If we were to say that this is an argument with premise and conclusion, will it be deemed right or will they mark us for making assumptions not mentioned explicitly in the text?
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!
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.
Quick question, say if we were to get a question similar to the tiger where they say P: Tigers are dangerous animals. C: Mammals do not make good pets. If we were to say that this is an argument with premise and conclusion, will it be deemed right or will they mark us for making assumptions not mentioned explicitly in the text?