I have found it is helpful when unsure to try to state the argument in reverse. For example:
The rights of businesses and the duty of government conflict -> the main issue is finding a successful compromise
This would be incorrect the other way around because it is not true and does not make sense to argue that all cases where the main issue is finding a successful compromise stem from the rights of businesses and the duty of governments conflicting
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.
I have found it is helpful when unsure to try to state the argument in reverse. For example:
The rights of businesses and the duty of government conflict -> the main issue is finding a successful compromise
This would be incorrect the other way around because it is not true and does not make sense to argue that all cases where the main issue is finding a successful compromise stem from the rights of businesses and the duty of governments conflicting