@josh689 Thank you!
Hi,
Could someone pls explain what the stimulus is saying and how is B a better(and correct) answer than B? None of the answers stuck out to me as actually addressing the gap in the stimulus and so I think I might have misunderstood the argument entirely.
Thanks in advance!
I have been at it with the games for about 2.5 months now. If it helps, I follow the pacifico strategy. I can do most of PT 1-23 with my worst being around ~5 on time or with time left. However, when I take a new game, even if I know how to complete it, it takes a long time and I end up missing half the questions. Hence, my timing is the same as it was when I first started fool-proofing even though I "feel" that my inferencing skills have gotten much stronger. I am trying not "hate" this section, but as someone who doesn't enjoy the games, the apparent ineffectiveness of fool-proofing is extremely frustrating. It feels like a waste of time especially because I have not dedicated as much time to the other sections which I am relatively good at: LR (-7 to -5) and RC(-5 to -2). Also, since I'm shooting for June, I don't think I have time to spend another month on fool-proofing. However, I know I need to get my current -10+ to something much lower to break into my goal score. I am just rambling now but I need suggestions on how to re-approach games. Has anyone tried something better than fool-proofing that has worked?
Me five! I could use some LG help.
@dimakyure869 Thank you!
I ultimately chose A, but really struggle to eliminate B--which turned out to be correct. However, I am having trouble understanding why B is a better answer? Thanks in advance.
Hi, definitely interested! Currently fool-proofing games and will be moving into PTs soon.
Upon review, these guys are definitely correct. I should have carefully read the stimulus smh!
@dimakyure869 Right, the book even emphasizes that the goal is to basically have the process become intuitive and not mechanical to the point of reciting the steps in one's head. I just started practicing the "drill" so I'll keep at it for a few more sections and hope for the best. Thank you for your input!
I am wondering if I'm doing mine correctly. My assumption is that once it "clicks," I can self-correct. But I might be wrong so I'm wondering how those of you that used the Loophole checked your drills for accuracy?
Hey,
One way to think of the necessary assumption is that it is proven/supported by the conclusion of the argument. Unlike the sufficient assumption, which proves the conclusion of an argument, the necessary assumption is instead proven by the conclusion. In the example Kole uses above being in NYC implies and supports that you are indeed in USA(the necessary condition). This, of course, is under the common knowledge that NYC is a city that is only found in the US. So, if you are in NYC, it is NECESSARY or must be true that you are also in the US. This is the reason why the negation test works to verify that you choose the correct answer. When we negate the necessary assumption, it destroys the argument. If the necessary assumption is not true, the argument cannot hold. If you are not in USA, you CANNOT be in the NYC(contrapositive). In practice, when I go through questions, I find the conclusion and premise of the argument first and then I ask myself "if this is true, what necessarily also has to be true?" Sometimes I can come up with guesses before even reading the answer choices, other times, just having that question in mind + the negation test, helps me figure out the right answer choice. Some of this is redundant here but hope this helps!
Hi, I am interested in this. I plan to take in April (might change depending on how my PTs are looking) and also really struggle with games. I think having a group focused on this section might be a good idea!
I have this same question lol. I can "see" how it helps to study with people who are perhaps on the same learning curve, have the same goals and skills as you so I wonder how the groups work here.
This link (of the 7sage Approved Tutors) might be helpful: https://classic.7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/4760/7sages-approved-tutors
Assumptions are basically the missing (or unstated) premises upon which the argument is based. They are the gaps between explicits premises and the conclusion. A solid argument is one that has as few of these gaps as possible. For example, if a stimulus reads: " Jenny loves to go on morning runs. People who go on morning runs are very disciplined in other areas of their lives. So, Jenny lives a healthy lifestyle..." This is not the strongest example out there, but obviously the argument makes an unwarranted leap from the premises to the conclusions. The assumption is that being disciplined translates to a healthy lifestyles. To strengthen the argument, you have to remedy the assumption or close the gap with something like "all people who are disciplined in their lives live a health lifestyle." This is similar, if not identical, to how I answer NA questions. Any other reverse statement would further weaken the argument.
In short, the way I figure out the assumptions in an argument is:
ID the conclusion + premises and ask myself: do the premises 100% support this conclusions?
If not 100%, then what assumption or leap must be made in order to make the support relationship 100%?
I think the most important thing in gaining the ability to find the assumption is your grasp of the relationship between the premises and the conclusion. If you can see how the premises support or do not support an argument, you can find the assumptions when they are present.
Hope this helps.
Congratulations and good luck with apps!
Following!
have the same question as above but interested!
Hey,
I have not started any applications yet (still have to take the LSAT) but I was a tutor at my university's writing center for most of my time in undergrad(just graduated) and so have a lot experience editing/reviewing all kinds of writing. If you are comfortable, I can def take a look at your essays.
@alexlr1080546 Great, happy to help!
Interested!