Identify the answer before looking at answer choices?

Comments

• 10000019 Alum Member

  July 2017 3279 karma

  I believe that depends on the problem type. Can you be more specific about the section/type of problem?
• 2 Likes

  akistotle Member ⭐ 🍌🍌

  July 2017 edited July 2017 9382 karma

  I would say.....

  For most MC, SA, PSA, Flaw, AP, lawgic-heavy MBT, and Bridging-type NA questions:
  https://media.giphy.com/media/3oz8xQdtCbTyk6Sxq0/giphy.gif

  For others:
  https://media.giphy.com/media/3o7qDDNLf1TCfsCTyU/giphy.gif
• 1 Like

  Alex Alum Member ⭐

  July 2017 23929 karma

  @mzoodle said:
  Should we identify the answer before looking at the answer choices?

  @akistotle killed it with the explanations and the gifs .... watch out @"Dillon A. Wright"
• 1 Like

  akistotle Member ⭐ 🍌🍌

  July 2017 9382 karma

  @"Alex Divine" said:

  @mzoodle said:
  Should we identify the answer before looking at the answer choices?

  @akistotle killed it with the explanations and the gifs .... watch out @"Dillon A. Wright"

  Haha! @"Dillon A. Wright" is a gif master...
• dml277 Alum Member

  July 2017 775 karma

  It's also helpful to be immediately aware of the four different possibilities the moment you see correlation/causation, looking for aspects that could have similarities/differences in analogies for strengthen/weaken questions. Not exactly the same as having one correct answer choice in mind after reading stimulus, but they're similar in that they're like our "anticipation" before going into the answer choices.
• LSATcantwin Alum Member Sage ⭐

  July 2017 13286 karma

  @akistotle said:

  @"Alex Divine" said:

  @mzoodle said:
  Should we identify the answer before looking at the answer choices?

  @akistotle killed it with the explanations and the gifs .... watch out @"Dillon A. Wright"

  Haha! @"Dillon A. Wright" is a gif master...

  How do you indetify flaws? I actually can't do this. When I read Flaw questions it always feels like a shot in the dark. I've always seen that people can do this but I can't figure out how they were able to get there....

  I know the types of flaws, but when I read a stim my head doesn't say "oh this is clearly xyz flaw" I have to go to the AC first
• akistotle Member ⭐ 🍌🍌

  July 2017 9382 karma

  @LSATcantwin said:

  @akistotle said:

  @"Alex Divine" said:

  @mzoodle said:
  Should we identify the answer before looking at the answer choices?

  @akistotle killed it with the explanations and the gifs .... watch out @"Dillon A. Wright"

  Haha! @"Dillon A. Wright" is a gif master...

  How do you indetify flaws? I actually can't do this. When I read Flaw questions it always feels like a shot in the dark. I've always seen that people can do this but I can't figure out how they were able to get there....

  I know the types of flaws, but when I read a stim my head doesn't say "oh this is clearly xyz flaw" I have to go to the AC first

  For descriptive weakening type of flaw questions, it's hard to anticipate what exactly the right AC will say, but you first have to identify the flaw in the argument before going to ACs. Otherwise, you will likely to be trapped by very attractive wrong ACs.
• LSATcantwin Alum Member Sage ⭐

  July 2017 13286 karma

  @akistotle said:

  @LSATcantwin said:

  @akistotle said:

  @"Alex Divine" said:

  @mzoodle said:
  Should we identify the answer before looking at the answer choices?

  @akistotle killed it with the explanations and the gifs .... watch out @"Dillon A. Wright"

  Haha! @"Dillon A. Wright" is a gif master...

  How do you indetify flaws? I actually can't do this. When I read Flaw questions it always feels like a shot in the dark. I've always seen that people can do this but I can't figure out how they were able to get there....

  I know the types of flaws, but when I read a stim my head doesn't say "oh this is clearly xyz flaw" I have to go to the AC first

  For descriptive weakening type of flaw questions, it's hard to anticipate what exactly the right AC will say, but you first have to identify the flaw in the argument before going to ACs. Otherwise, you will likely to be trapped by very attractive wrong ACs.

  Yeah but I mean when I read an argument I can tell it's flawed, and I have some sense of how it's flawed, but it is very very weak. How do you strengthen that
• akistotle Member ⭐ 🍌🍌

  July 2017 9382 karma

  @akistotle said:

  @LSATcantwin said:

  @akistotle said:

  @"Alex Divine" said:

  @mzoodle said:
  Should we identify the answer before looking at the answer choices?

  @akistotle killed it with the explanations and the gifs .... watch out @"Dillon A. Wright"

  Haha! @"Dillon A. Wright" is a gif master...

  How do you indetify flaws? I actually can't do this. When I read Flaw questions it always feels like a shot in the dark. I've always seen that people can do this but I can't figure out how they were able to get there....

  I know the types of flaws, but when I read a stim my head doesn't say "oh this is clearly xyz flaw" I have to go to the AC first

  For descriptive weakening type of flaw questions, it's hard to anticipate what exactly the right AC will say, but you first have to identify the flaw in the argument before going to ACs. Otherwise, you will likely to be trapped by very attractive wrong ACs.

  Yeah but I mean when I read an argument I can tell it's flawed, and I have some sense of how it's flawed, but it is very very weak. How do you strengthen that

  Hmmm. I think you have to get used to it by drilling a lot of question.

  Also, I think you have to get used to the language of ACs. For example, the argument says: "All Jedi can use force; thus, All force users are Jedi." You can immediately tell it's a sufficiency-necessity flaw, but the right answer choice might say "Hey, you are forgetting about Darth Vader!"
• 2 Likes

  SA135790 Member

  July 2017 129 karma

  @LSATcantwin Do you have the Trainer? The chapters dedicated to Flaw questions/drills were extremely helpful with gaining an intuitive approach to Flaw questions. If not, no worries. 7sage's core curriculum thoroughly covers what you need to know.

  I would recommend drilling flaw questions but before looking at the answer choices, identify/prephrase the substance of the flaw. You may not get it the first couple of rounds but eventually with practice you will be able to identify the flaw and soon identify them quickly. Your job is to critically evaluate the reasoning used to justify the conclusion. That is it.

  Isolate the premise and conclusion and focus on the relationship between the two. Be hyper critical of this relationship and more importantly if you get it wrong, identify why you got it wrong. What did you miss? Why is the answer you chose wrong. In doing so, you can identify the holes in your reasoning and consciously work to fill them. Do not be a bystander during your review sessions. Side note, I recommend that you do this with every question you get wrong during your BR/Drill Review.

  The author believes that the reasons given (the support) is enough to validate the conclusion. However, you know that is definitely not the case. There is a gap, there is a flaw the author is making. Ask yourself:
  What is the author forgetting to think about when making this argument that he/she should?
  What is the author taking for granted? In other words, how is the assumption the author is making wrong? What is the connection the author assumes to exist but actually doesn't?

  The LSAT is a test composed of patterns. The more problems you do the more trends you will pick up. To master flaw questions, you must take the time to practice prephrasing what the gap/flaw is. Once you master that, you will learn the standard abstract language that is used to describe these basic flaws. At that stage in your prep, it will be much, much easier moving forward. If anything, learning how to tackle these questions quickly and efficiently will help you move faster through other subjective based questions. Do not rely on the answer choices to guide you, if anything the wrong choices are designed to confuse you and play on your weaknesses.

  One final thing, what has helped me the most is changing my attitude towards question types I struggle with. I approach them as a challenge that I plan to conquer. In other words, make it fun. I hope this helps!
• Alex Alum Member ⭐

  July 2017 23929 karma

  @akistotle said:

  @akistotle said:

  @LSATcantwin said:

  @akistotle said:

  @"Alex Divine" said:

  @mzoodle said:
  Should we identify the answer before looking at the answer choices?

  @akistotle killed it with the explanations and the gifs .... watch out @"Dillon A. Wright"

  Haha! @"Dillon A. Wright" is a gif master...

  How do you indetify flaws? I actually can't do this. When I read Flaw questions it always feels like a shot in the dark. I've always seen that people can do this but I can't figure out how they were able to get there....

  I know the types of flaws, but when I read a stim my head doesn't say "oh this is clearly xyz flaw" I have to go to the AC first

  For descriptive weakening type of flaw questions, it's hard to anticipate what exactly the right AC will say, but you first have to identify the flaw in the argument before going to ACs. Otherwise, you will likely to be trapped by very attractive wrong ACs.

  Yeah but I mean when I read an argument I can tell it's flawed, and I have some sense of how it's flawed, but it is very very weak. How do you strengthen that

  Hmmm. I think you have to get used to it by drilling a lot of question.

  Also, I think you have to get used to the language of ACs. For example, the argument says: "All Jedi can use force; thus, All force users are Jedi." You can immediately tell it's a sufficiency-necessity flaw, but the right answer choice might say "Hey, you are forgetting about Darth Vader!"

  To this, I agree 100%. Drilling more question and exposure in this case will help you a lot. You begin to see that a lot of the flaws begin to seem repetitive to the point where you see a new flaw descriptive question on a new PT and swear you've done it before.
• 1 Like

  AllezAllez21 Member Inactive Sage Inactive ⭐

  July 2017 edited July 2017 1917 karma

  Great response by @SA135790 .

  For me, it was a combination of working through various levels of abstraction and then familiarizing the way the LSAT writes their answers. So at first, I could point out only very obvious/general gaps in the reasoning, then I worked up to pointing out flaws using the specific language in the stimulus, then I graduated to using more abstract language to describe flaws. I don't advocate prephrasing really, but in drilling I think it's good to analyze a question deeply before going into the answer choices.

  Throughout the PT phase, I just got really familiar with the ways the LSAT describes flaws, because they use the same language repeatedly. That helped me to quickly get past their complicated wording and understand the flaw that was being described in an answer choice.
• TheMikey Alum Member

  July 2017 4196 karma

  Yeah, I typically do try to predict what the answer could be. But with your pre-phrase, you still need to keep an open-mind because the right AC might be something completely different to what you anticipate.
• 1 Like

  inactive Alum Member

  July 2017 12637 karma

  @"Alex Divine" said:

  @mzoodle said:
  Should we identify the answer before looking at the answer choices?

  @akistotle killed it with the explanations and the gifs .... watch out @"Dillon A. Wright"

  https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BmxUysoCAAEYkZ6.jpg
• Alex Alum Member ⭐

  July 2017 23929 karma

  @"Dillon A. Wright" said:

  @"Alex Divine" said:

  @mzoodle said:
  Should we identify the answer before looking at the answer choices?

  @akistotle killed it with the explanations and the gifs .... watch out @"Dillon A. Wright"

  https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BmxUysoCAAEYkZ6.jpg

  God, I love how fitting your GIF/meme game is @"Dillon A. Wright" People must hear me start laughing randomly and think I've gone insane lol

  Like how do you search for the perfect Jaime Lee Curtis being angry picture, haha. You're an artist damnit!