Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Apply for Membership

Categories

Any Good Resources for Suff. Assumption Strategy?

Controller779Controller779 Alum Member
edited February 2015 in General 221 karma
I'm totally thrown on S.U questions; I've been back through the theory videos and still get 100% of the questions wrong. During BR I can't seem to understand why right questions are right and why wrong questions are wrong.

My logic skills, during the letter exercises (drawing inferences, etc) are strong; things seem to just fall apart when having to instead deal with word-based stimuli and logic structures that are not as clear cut as they were during the theory exercises.

Does anyone have an external resources they know of that could help bridge the gap? If so, I'd be very grateful and may even be able to avoid going totally grey before October ;)

Thanks.
Show Related Discussions

Comments

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Free Trial
    578 karma
    MANHATTEN LR brand new from amazon for $35 . I have heard good reviews about trainer as well so I would buy that too. But definitely can tell you that you need Manhatten LR.
    It sounds to me to like your a lsat beginner so keep on drilling. For me the drawing inferences didn't work because I found it troubling to draw out the inferences when I hit a long stimulus. Manhatten LR teaches you to use your head and understand the argument without drawing out the inferences.
  • Controller779Controller779 Alum Member
    221 karma
    Great info, thanks. It's on order!

    I'll probably hold off on any more S.U. questions until it comes, and just work on other areas of the 7Sage syllabus.
  • blah170blahblah170blah Alum Inactive ⭐
    3545 karma
    @jamesjentucker I'm not trying to be cheeky in ANY WAY but what does the "U" in "S.U" stand for?
  • ddakjikingddakjiking Inactive ⭐
    2116 karma
    @blah170blah Probably just SUfficient assumption lol
  • blah170blahblah170blah Alum Inactive ⭐
    3545 karma
    lol k that's what I thought but then I wondered if I was not familiar with some new hip LSAT lingo and freaked out.

    My god LSAT, what have you done to me!
  • emli1000emli1000 Alum Member Inactive ⭐
    3462 karma
    Have you reviewed the Intro to Logic section in the course? Maybe go over that section another time. You might grasps some concepts better a second time around.
  • blah170blahblah170blah Alum Inactive ⭐
    edited February 2015 3545 karma
    Hi @jamesjentucker! How do you do on other assumption questions? I ask because sufficient assumptions, I believe, are supposed to be the easier form of assumption questions so I'm wondering if there's some conceptual misunderstanding taking place (don't disparage though!).

    At any rate, sufficient assumption questions really require reading carefully. A lot of the times, the right answer to the sufficient assumption question bridges a term shift.
    For instance, let's say we have something like this:

    Premise: All ring-bearers can reside in Valinor.
    LAWGIC FORM: RB --> Valinor
    ------------------------------------------------
    Conclusion: Frodo can reside in Valinor.
    LAWGIC FORM: Frodo --> Valinor

    In this example, we have a subject shift. We're introduced to the subject/noun "ring-bearer" in the premise but then all of a sudden there's no mention of "ring-bearer" in the conclusion. Instead, we have this object called "Frodo." Yet, both subjects carry the same necessary condition ("ring-bearers" and apparently "Frodo" can reside in Valinor). That means we need a sentence that connects these two subjects. Something like: Frodo is a ring-bearer. (LAWGIC FORM: Frodo --> RB) Voila! Now that we know Frodo is a ring bearer, and that all ring bearers can reside in Valinor, it must absolutely be true that Frodo can also reside in Valinor.

    If you diagram this, it should look something like:
    (Frodo --> RB) <--- this is the answer that we need
    RB --> Valinor
    ------------
    Frodo --> Valinor

    If it helps you, try diagramming the lawgic out. It's a lot easier to catch the term shift when you observe the lawgic form as opposed to normal-English form.
  • blah170blahblah170blah Alum Inactive ⭐
    3545 karma
    omg, I totally misread the headline for this thread (misread "resources" for "tips"). I'll echo what's been said and recommend Manhattan.
  • emli1000emli1000 Alum Member Inactive ⭐
    3462 karma
    @blah170blah Look what the LSAT has done to you.... LOL
  • blah170blahblah170blah Alum Inactive ⭐
    3545 karma
    @emli1000 omg I know... so embarrassing. I'm going to go get some fresh air... or something haha
  • Controller779Controller779 Alum Member
    221 karma
    Thanks for the great info!

    I think my train of thought genuinely was "Sufficient Ussumption".

    So many hours of LSAT has me operating phonetically...!
  • emli1000emli1000 Alum Member Inactive ⭐
    3462 karma
    http://www.thelsattrainer.com/assets/18suffassumptionandsupportingprinciple.pdf
Sign In or Register to comment.