Since when can animals be considered phenomenon? Forum

[ReadingNation]

Can someone help me figure out Question 11, PT 9, Section 2 ... I remembered when I first tackled the question none of the a.c.'s clicked with me but I felt (c) was the strongest ... The second time I tackled this question I knew (e) was the correct a.c. but I still felt the same way I felt the same time ... the Kaplan explanations did not help any ... does anyone know of any satisfactory explanations for (E) ... Thanks

[Oblomov]

.

[ReadingNation]

Oblomov, that was abstract, could you explain more? For example, what exactly in the prompt/stimulus would you label the 'phenomenon'? Thanks : )

[Oblomov]

.

[erniesto]

Your understanding of what a phenomenon is is simply lacking.

[ReadingNation]

Awwww! Was I suppose to feel insulted? I guess you just like trolling around waiting for new members to post the first message and then make a pathetic attempt at being witty. Thanks 3853 attempts at being facetious doesn't do it for you! Now, for anyone mature enough to actually take my question seriously any help is still welcome : ) And if you happen to agree with Oblomov then by all means enlighten me by answering the question and explaining the rational behind 11 E) : )

[Oblomov]

.

[ReadingNation]

Erniesto, here's my attempt at a constructive conversation, I think I have a pretty good idea of what a phenomenon is, a unique observable fact or event and/or a person with unique, exceptional talent. Now I guess I could go on Meriam Webster and get an official definition but please do tell me exactly what is it that I'm misunderstanding and while you're at it you could explain 11 E) as well, even if feels like your condescending down to my level : )

[dakatz]

A phenomenon, with regard to logic, is nothing more than the occurrance of an event. Me walking across the room is a phenomenon. For example, you are often given conditional rules such as A ---> B. So if you know that A has actually occured, then you have a phenomenon, as well as the phenomenon of B, whatever the actual event is. It is the coliquial usage that defines phenomenon as somthing unique or special. Do away with that definition on the LSAT.

[romothesavior]

A phenomenon, with regard to logic, is nothing more than the occurrance of an event. Me walking across the room is a phenomenon. For example, you are often given conditional rules such as A ---> B. So if you know that A has actually occured, then you have a phenomenon, as well as the phenomenon of B, whatever the actual event is. It is the coliquial usage that defines phenomenon as somthing unique or special. Do away with that definition on the LSAT.

+1. Next time you don't know what a word means, don't just assume you know. Look it up in the dictionary.

[fiftyonefifty]

phenomenon is a thing.

Animals/ dinosaurs are things.

Testmasters have a list of words that frequently appears in lsat questions and their synonym for phenomenon is thing.

[ReadingNation]

Here is a portion from Kaplan ... Now, I don't subscribe to the belief that if Kaplan says it is so, then it must be true but I believe the following does strengthen my contention that there's something amiss with the way Lsat is using the word 'phenomenon' ...

Kaplan quote:

"As (E) says, the argument presents evidence that a past phenomenon - I guess dinosaurs can be considered a "phenomenon" - is more similiar to one rather than the other of two present-day phenomena."

So again, you could mock me or you could actually demonstrate that you understand 11 (E) and explain it to me, please stoop down to my level ... Lol ... i gotta admit, I'm loving this : )

P.S. Dakatz ... thank you for your input/help ... I was writing my post when you posted your respective post so the above is not directed at you ...

[dakatz]

Here is a portion from Kaplan ... Now, I don't subscribe to the belief that if Kaplan says it is so, then it must be true but I believe the following does strengthen my contention that there's something amiss with the way Lsat is using the word 'phenomenon' ...

Kaplan quote:

"As (E) says, the argument presents evidence that a past phenomenon - I guess dinosaurs can be considered a "phenomenon" - is more similiar to one rather than the other of two present-day phenomena."

So again, you could mock me or you could actually demonstrate that you understand 11 (E) and explain it to me, please stoop down to my level ... Lol ... i gotta admit, I'm loving this : )

P.S. Romothesavior and Dakatz ... thank you for your input/help ... I was writing my post when you posted your respective posts so the above is not directed at you ...

No problem. I'd look up the actual question in order to be more specific if I had my books with me.

[ReadingNation]

fiftyonefifty, thank you for your input as well ... I've never seen the LSAT used a word that runs contrary to its common meaning ('unique' in everyday vernacular vs. the apparent 'ordinary' context it holds in logic) so this has been a helpful experience to say the least ... is their a pdf file of that Testmaster list somewhere? I don't want to get caught off guard like this again ... Thanks once again

[ReadingNation]

Romothesavior,

I’ll assume you meant to say, “The next time you believe you know what a word means, don’t assume you know the entirety of all the word’s meanings” otherwise your foray into didacticism would be mildly assuming seeing as your critique as is would not apply to me : )

[fiftyonefifty]

fiftyonefifty, thank you for your input as well ... I've never seen the LSAT used a word that runs contrary to its common meaning ('unique' in everyday vernacular vs. the apparent 'ordinary' context it holds in logic) so this has been a helpful experience to say the least ... is their a pdf file of that Testmaster list somewhere? I don't want to get caught off guard like this again ... Thanks once again

I remember taking the practice drill online in the testmasters memebers only area. Our instructor specifically discussed this term in class the next day. It has been over 2 years and I no longer has access to the online drill.

I'm sure someone who is currently taking a testmasters course will have access to these common words. It's a big list.

[ReadingNation]

Thank you fiftyonefifty,

judging from the initial reception I received I won't hold my breath but hopefully someone will read this later on and will be generous enough to do so : )

[KevinP]

As people have already stated, phenomenon on the LSAT has a different meaning than in popular usage.

Make sure you know other common words used on the LSAT which differ from their colloquial meaning. For example, on the LSAT, "some" means at least 1 possibly all.

[ReadingNation]

Yeah, I was aware of 'some', one of my friends warn me about it, but thanks nevertheless ... Could you think of other examples off the top of your head besides 'some' and 'phenomenon' though? Like i said, 'phenomenon' was the first word I encountered on the Lsat were its common usage clashed with the way the Lsat was using it and I don't want it to happen again. I mean, given my prior knowledge of phenomenon there was no way in hell I had any chance of answering #11 correctly ... or maybe I shouldn't be that freaked out about it ... I've gone through 22 prep test so far and this is the first time it happened so if worst comes to worst I could accept that ratio

[fiftyonefifty]

i found some words in my old workbooks. Ill type it up and pm them to you.

[dakatz]

The word "or" can mix some people up. When we hear A or B in typical usuage, we assume that the factors are mutually exclusive. We hear steak or fish, black or white, Paris or London, and we assume that only one can be picked. But on the LSAT, "or" means one, or the other, or BOTH.

[KevinP]

Only a few come to mind at the moment. Namely, an interference in common usage means probably true while in logic, and on the LSAT LR, an inference means it must be true. Many means 2 or more, possibly all. Most means greater than 50%. I think you probably already knew this though .

@fiftyonefifty, if it wouldn't be too much trouble, could you PM them to me also? Much obliged.

[romothesavior]

Almost every word in the dictionary has more than one definition. To assume you know it all by knowing one definition or the most common definition will hurt you a lot, especially on the LSAT. Even before I started studying for the LSAT, I knew that phenomenon did not just mean "supernatural" or "unusual." If you were confused by the word's application, then you probably should just look it up.

So here you go... Look at the first definition listed in Merriam-Webster:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/phenomenon

Also, I will go grab my Kaplan book and check out the question and see if I can help you dissect it. Give me a few minutes.

[texaspecial88]

Oblomov, that was abstract, could you explain more? For example, what exactly in the prompt/stimulus would you label the 'phenomenon'? Thanks : )

Now I just feel bad. I was mocking your question and the Critique of Pure Reason at the same time.

I have no idea; I don't have any practice tests nor Kaplan books.

So douchie. Some TLSers desperate attempts to seem smart never cease to amuse me. Get a life.

[dutchstriker]

Depends if were talking about the animal-in-itself or the animal-as-presented-to-the-understanding.

I laughed. Apparently knowledge of Kant makes you a douche, though.

To the OP, the use of phenomena in this question does seem a bit odd. You should be able to eliminate all the other answer choices. If phenomenon is taken to mean thing, then it's obviously the correct choice. The LSAT likes to be unnecessarily obfuscating like that.