Exactly right @LoraxMan. Correlation alone can never be used to prove causation, but a strong correlation can go a long way to help strengthen an established causal relationship.
bumping this because I think this is super important! The difference between causation and conditionality has always been a bit fuzzy for me but @"Accounts Playable" you made the distinction super clear! Thank you!
I have found (many times) on LR section: one being particularly more difficult than the other eg : I have -1 -2 on one of the LRs and -5 -6 on another . Not sure if this is merely a correlation or if there is a causation there.
What would the necessary assumption be? I already perceived the correlation-causation flaw but couldn't fit that as an answer choice in this necessary assumption question type
Accounts playable is right, most of the causation weaken/strengthening questions that i have come across draw some correlation between two things and then make a casual conclusion that you either need to best weaken or best strengthen.
@alexandergreene93 said:
It's not a good idea to look at people like Lloyd Blankfein or David Rubinstein and conclude that getting a JD will put you in a similar position.
Causation can appear in pretty much ... you can't use the causation strategies if the question doesn ... problem? Trying to apply the causation strategy when it's not ...
... 'll nail everything related to causation on the LSAT. It should ... the Scientific Method, which covers causation in reasonable depth. It should ...