Understanding the Stimulus

Logic Gainz

When you guys read an argument, are you guys breaking it down as you read (e.g. the sentence I just read is a premise, this next one is the conclusion), or are you reading the stimulus intuitively to understand what it says, and then evaluating the validity after?

Padawan

Excellent question. Mastery of stimulus is key and getting there is the battle. I have seen both approaches. It depends on the person. J.Y. is able to break it down as he is reading it, and then it looks like he goes back with more critical analysis and intuition. It looks like teaching it to others has reinforced and solidified this process for him and other Sages. The webinars on active reading and LR questions will help you with this as well. They are valuable and should be used in conjunction with CC. Good luck.

shegotit

I write the premise and conclusion to the side and if it I didn't understand it the first time then I break it down even further during my blind review

DByrne07

I try to underline the Conclusion each time depending on question type.

Louislepauvre

I'm definitely breaking it down as I read, but I don't think mainly in terms of "this is a premise; this is the conclusion" (though I definitely am always establishing the conclusion). When I read a stimulus, I mainly consider the key variables that are playing in the relationship. Like, if it's blood pressure goes up and the argument is claiming it's because of stress, etc. Basically, I am mainly evaluating the strength/weakness/possible assumptions within those relationships (also, if the relationship is complex with years and percentages and maps and charts, I'll draw a little diagram). That way when I read the question stem (I don't read the stem first, like JY instructs), I have a predicted answer for that. That's my method. I'm not perfect though. I average about 20ish on LR. Hoping to get it up to 23 by July 23 (fingers crossed...).

keets993

A little bit of both. I intuitively understand but I make sure to repeat what the premise and conclusion is to myself after I read the stimulus before I go through the answer choices. I think it's realllly important people understand the stimulus before they go on to the answer choices because the chances of getting baited and trapped increases if you don't even know what to look for. Of course, this is an ideal and not something you can accomplish in timed conditions but you definitly should aim for that level of understand of BR. I might mark the stimulus during timed conditions if its a particularly difficult question that relies upon subtlety.

sandypants

When I first started studying for the LSAT, I wasn't as good at breaking it down so I definitely started with my intuition, and I was often wrong. However, as I went through BR I started breaking down the arguments, which in turn helped my own understanding of argument structures. So these days as we approach the July LSAT, it just seems clear what is what, intuitively.

I think the more people study and do questions, the better they get at figuring out their style of tackling arguments. Like JY says, though, I definitely think it's of utmost importance to be able to identify conclusions/premises, so it should figure in somewhere there!

helentang02

I definitely keep an eye out for indicator words for the conclusion and the premise. But for me, I find first understanding the stimulus is helpful. So basically, as I'm reading, or before hoping into the question, I pause and make sure what the conclusion and premise is. Specifically, questions that ask what the purpose of the sentence was or the overall conclusion of the stimulus has worked well for me. I struggled with this too. Love reading everyone's approach.

Logic Gainz

Thanks, team!