PT62 S2 Q4

bilbaosan
Posts: 108
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:58 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby bilbaosan » Sun Sep 29, 2013 9:39 pm

ScottRiqui wrote:OP, I'd also like to point out that this is question FOUR in the section, meaning that it's what we like to call "a gimme". If you're having this much trouble in the first half-dozen questions of an LR section, and thinking about it this much, it's a sure sign that you're missing something fundamental.


The fundamental thing I'm missing is having English my nth language (3rd or 4th depending on how you count). It does show up indeed, typically in a form that I read the stimulus and had absolutely no idea what it was all about. I can still make it if it is a necessary assumption or certain weaken q's, but if it is "most strongly supported", I don't even bother.

The stimulus tells us that only one thing is holding Morris back from getting what she wants.
Analysts predict that she's going to get what she wants anyway. How could we support their prediction?
Oh look - one of the answer choices says that the VERY THING Morris needs is probably going to happen!


Yeah, so I looked at "B" and "E" and crossed out "E" because it speaks about "probably would happen" while the analysts say it WILL happen. Easy?

User avatar
ScottRiqui
Posts: 3640
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:09 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby ScottRiqui » Sun Sep 29, 2013 9:45 pm

bilbaosan wrote:Now, I don't disagree that E does make the conclusion more likely - but only IF the probability happens to be true (which we don't know). However so does B IF the current offer is good enough to be accepted (which we don't know either). Neither answer makes the argument airtight, but neither could be stated to provide more support than another, since both rely on things outside the scope of the question.


I'm going to try one more time, and then I'm done. Answer 'E' requires NOTHING outside the scope of the question. It says that a bankruptcy sale will PROBABLY happen. That is, there is a high likelihood of it happening. Check the definitions of 'probably' that people posted earlier.

So the one thing that Morris needs to happen has a high likelihood of happening, according to 'E'. That's all you need to support the analysts' prediction.

'B' does nothing to support their position without bringing in assumptions. Knowing that Morris has made an offer to buy the company gives you no reason to believe that Azedcorp will finally sell after all the times they've refused to sell.

bilbaosan
Posts: 108
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:58 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby bilbaosan » Sun Sep 29, 2013 9:45 pm

PourMeTea wrote:Why are you fighting all of the explanations people are giving you instead of trying to understand them? A great LSAT tutor (Jeffort) is taking the time to explain the answer choices in a lot of detail, but you seem to be so convinced that (B) is a better choice that you aren't listening to the very, very clear reasoning he has laid out. You will see some improvement if you stop fighting the test and start learning and adapting.


Guys, I really appreciate your efforts trying to explain this to me. And I'm not fighting the explanations, I just disagree with the logic.

User avatar
ScottRiqui
Posts: 3640
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:09 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby ScottRiqui » Sun Sep 29, 2013 9:48 pm

bilbaosan wrote:
Yeah, so I looked at "B" and "E" and crossed out "E" because it speaks about "probably would happen" while the analysts say it WILL happen. Easy?


We only have to *provide support* for the analysts' position, not prove them correct. E does this, B doesn't.

bilbaosan
Posts: 108
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:58 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby bilbaosan » Sun Sep 29, 2013 9:50 pm

JWP1022 wrote:Probably means "likely." What world are you living in bro? Also, you're never going to learn the test if you post questions about certain concepts/LR stems and then fight tooth and nail when people try to explain them to you.

Edit:

Here's a definition. You're wrong, sorry.

prob·a·bly
ˈpräbəblē,ˈpräblē/Submit
adverb
adverb: probably
1.
almost certainly; as far as one knows or can tell.
"she would probably never see him again"
synonyms: in all likelihood, in all probability, as likely as not, (very/most) likely, ten to one, the chances are, doubtless, no doubt;


Wow! I just learned something new.
Indeed, in American English this word also indicates the degree of possibility. Not in British English though, but I knew long time ago LSAT is biased. It is just sad the test relies on such little details.

I didn't know that. Then E is definitely correct. Thank you everyone for the explanation, especially on Sunday! Good luck with the test!

PS. I also found out that more difficult questions use language much more carefully than simpler questions, and their answers are typically ironclad. I have never had issues with any questions difficulty 3+ even when I got them wrong, it is usually always clear why.
Last edited by bilbaosan on Sun Sep 29, 2013 9:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
ScottRiqui
Posts: 3640
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:09 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby ScottRiqui » Sun Sep 29, 2013 9:53 pm

bilbaosan wrote:Wow! I just learned something new.
Indeed, in American English this word also indicates the degree of possibility. Not in British English though, but I knew long time ago LSAT is biased.


You looked up the wrong word; there's a difference between "probability" and "probably".

Even in British English, "probably" means "very likely".

User avatar
JWP1022
Posts: 269
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:15 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby JWP1022 » Sun Sep 29, 2013 9:55 pm

bilbaosan wrote:
JWP1022 wrote:Probably means "likely." What world are you living in bro? Also, you're never going to learn the test if you post questions about certain concepts/LR stems and then fight tooth and nail when people try to explain them to you.

Edit:

Here's a definition. You're wrong, sorry.

prob·a·bly
ˈpräbəblē,ˈpräblē/Submit
adverb
adverb: probably
1.
almost certainly; as far as one knows or can tell.
"she would probably never see him again"
synonyms: in all likelihood, in all probability, as likely as not, (very/most) likely, ten to one, the chances are, doubtless, no doubt;


Wow! I just learned something new.
Indeed, in American English this word also indicates the degree of possibility. Not in British English though, but I knew long time ago LSAT is biased. It is just sad the test relies on such little details.

I didn't know that. Then E is definitely correct. Thank you everyone for the explanation, especially on Sunday! Good luck with the test!


Good! I didn't realize English wasn't your first language, so my apologies for my post seeming snarky. :)

bilbaosan
Posts: 108
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:58 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby bilbaosan » Sun Sep 29, 2013 9:55 pm

ScottRiqui wrote:You looked up the wrong word; there's a difference between "probability" and "probably".

Even in British English, "probably" means "very likely".


Learned something new again. Thank you ScottRiqui!
That's probably the most useful thing I'd get from doing those test preps besides finding some really interesting articles to read.
Last edited by bilbaosan on Sun Sep 29, 2013 9:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Jeffort
Posts: 1897
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2008 4:43 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby Jeffort » Sun Sep 29, 2013 9:55 pm

bilbaosan wrote:
PourMeTea wrote:Why are you fighting all of the explanations people are giving you instead of trying to understand them? A great LSAT tutor (Jeffort) is taking the time to explain the answer choices in a lot of detail, but you seem to be so convinced that (B) is a better choice that you aren't listening to the very, very clear reasoning he has laid out. You will see some improvement if you stop fighting the test and start learning and adapting.


Guys, I really appreciate your efforts trying to explain this to me. And I'm not fighting the explanations, I just disagree with the logic.


Right, because you are using flawed reasoning to support your position, that is your problem that needs fixing.

You keep saying that because the probability (E) gives to Morris getting the shares is not absolute that it doesn't at all make the argument stronger (meaning make the conclusion MORE LIKELY to be true than it is without including the AC as a premise). That is flawed reasoning. The question stem only asks for an answer that increases the probability that the stated conclusion is a true statement, not fully guaranteeing something doesn't mean that it doesn't help. (E) helps the conclusion a lot, so it supports the argument.

Your reasoning is based again on expecting the CR to guarantee the conclusion is true, which this question type doesn't require.

You are still obstinately trying to hold onto the notion that the problem is not with your thinking but is some difference in opinion about the basics of logical reasoning.

(E) increases the likelihood the conclusion is going to turn out to be true, therefore it supports, what is so hard to accept about that reasoning? It is what you keep disagreeing with, why?

bilbaosan
Posts: 108
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:58 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby bilbaosan » Sun Sep 29, 2013 10:00 pm

Jeffort wrote:You are still obstinately trying to hold onto the notion that the problem is not with your thinking but is some difference in opinion about the basics of logical reasoning.

(E) increases the likelihood the conclusion is going to turn out to be true, therefore it supports, what is so hard to accept about that reasoning? It is what you keep disagreeing with, why?


Thank you Jeffort for your help!
I see it now, I got brainlocked between "probably" and "probability" and didn't know "probably" is more "likely to happen" than "has a chance to happen".

User avatar
Jeffort
Posts: 1897
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2008 4:43 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby Jeffort » Sun Sep 29, 2013 10:06 pm

bilbaosan wrote:
Jeffort wrote:You are still obstinately trying to hold onto the notion that the problem is not with your thinking but is some difference in opinion about the basics of logical reasoning.

(E) increases the likelihood the conclusion is going to turn out to be true, therefore it supports, what is so hard to accept about that reasoning? It is what you keep disagreeing with, why?


Thank you Jeffort for your help!
I see it now, I got brainlocked between "probably" and "probability" and didn't know "probably" is more "likely to happen" than "has a chance to happen".


Ahh, that would explain it!! Glad that got sorted out! The other replies came up while I wrote my post.

Do pay attention to the stuff we said about using assumptions to rationalize answer choices though since you need to conform your analysis to LSAT specs if you want to see improvement. If you need to add an unsupported assumption in to rationalize an answer choice (other than sometimes for resolve/explain Qs), you are staring at a trap answer, don't pick it! Sticking with that rule of analysis should smooth things out a bunch and take away the friction you are having with certain things.

bilbaosan
Posts: 108
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:58 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby bilbaosan » Sun Sep 29, 2013 10:13 pm

Jeffort wrote:Ahh, that would explain it!! Glad that got sorted out! The other replies came up while I wrote my post.

Do pay attention to the stuff we said about using assumptions to rationalize answer choices though since you need to conform your analysis to LSAT specs if you want to see improvement. If you need to add an unsupported assumption in to rationalize an answer choice (other than sometimes for resolve/explain Qs), you are staring at a trap answer, don't pick it! Sticking with that rule of analysis should smooth things out a bunch and take away the friction you are having with certain things.


Yes. Thank you again. I'm usually good at LR assuming I understand what the question is about, this one caught me off guard.

User avatar
Jeffort
Posts: 1897
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2008 4:43 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby Jeffort » Sun Sep 29, 2013 10:25 pm

bilbaosan wrote:
Jeffort wrote:Ahh, that would explain it!! Glad that got sorted out! The other replies came up while I wrote my post.

Do pay attention to the stuff we said about using assumptions to rationalize answer choices though since you need to conform your analysis to LSAT specs if you want to see improvement. If you need to add an unsupported assumption in to rationalize an answer choice (other than sometimes for resolve/explain Qs), you are staring at a trap answer, don't pick it! Sticking with that rule of analysis should smooth things out a bunch and take away the friction you are having with certain things.


Yes. Thank you again. I'm usually good at LR assuming I understand what the question is about, this one caught me off guard.


I feel for you man, I cannot imagine the layers of extra difficulty you face with English being your xth (around 4th?) language to acquire. There are many layers of translation as well as layers of cultural and life experiences differences in between where you started and went before getting to English.

I'm sure there are still some more 'lost in translation' issues that haven't been flushed out yet, so make sure to look up the simple plain English meanings of any words or phrases you encounter that cause you trouble in any questions. Important logically significant words you need to know, such as probably, tend to be used repeatedly on the LSAT so you should get all the important ones covered by looking up whatever comes your way while going through tests.

bilbaosan
Posts: 108
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:58 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby bilbaosan » Mon Sep 30, 2013 12:56 am

Jeffort wrote:I feel for you man, I cannot imagine the layers of extra difficulty you face with English being your xth (around 4th?) language to acquire. There are many layers of translation as well as layers of cultural and life experiences differences in between where you started and went before getting to English.


The main problem is that this component makes the test extremely random for us, as there is always a chance to get the RC like PT51 where LR1, RC and LR2 were completely incomprehensible (one of my worst PTs ever). Then you get something like PT39 and score 171 on it because there was not a single unknown word there. This is why I say LSAT is biased, because its English usage varies significantly more than it would be reasonably expected from a law education test. What is amazing is that I read 3+ court decisions a day, and none of them is as hard to comprehend as a typical LSAT RC passage. Even the state courts write easily comprehensible decisions.

I'm sure there are still some more 'lost in translation' issues that haven't been flushed out yet, so make sure to look up the simple plain English meanings of any words or phrases you encounter that cause you trouble in any questions. Important logically significant words you need to know, such as probably, tend to be used repeatedly on the LSAT so you should get all the important ones covered by looking up whatever comes your way while going through tests.


That's good advice. I've made a note already, but it is a great point to make. Thank you again!

User avatar
Clearly
Posts: 4167
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 4:09 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby Clearly » Mon Sep 30, 2013 1:00 am

bilbaosan wrote:
Jeffort wrote:I feel for you man, I cannot imagine the layers of extra difficulty you face with English being your xth (around 4th?) language to acquire. There are many layers of translation as well as layers of cultural and life experiences differences in between where you started and went before getting to English.


The main problem is that this component makes the test extremely random for us, as there is always a chance to get the RC like PT51 where LR1, RC and LR2 were completely incomprehensible (one of my worst PTs ever). Then you get something like PT39 and score 171 on it because there was not a single unknown word there. This is why I say LSAT is biased, because its English usage varies significantly more than it would be reasonably expected from a law education test. What is amazing is that I read 3+ court decisions a day, and none of them is as hard to comprehend as a typical LSAT RC passage. Even the state courts write easily comprehensible decisions.

I'm sure there are still some more 'lost in translation' issues that haven't been flushed out yet, so make sure to look up the simple plain English meanings of any words or phrases you encounter that cause you trouble in any questions. Important logically significant words you need to know, such as probably, tend to be used repeatedly on the LSAT so you should get all the important ones covered by looking up whatever comes your way while going through tests.


That's good advice. I've made a note already, but it is a great point to make. Thank you again!

Idk man, biased is a strong word. Not everything is global, using tricky English is acceptable on a difficult test that is written in English. I fully expect I'd fail a test in another language, but I wouldn't feel slighted for that.

bilbaosan
Posts: 108
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:58 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby bilbaosan » Mon Sep 30, 2013 2:17 pm

Clearly wrote:Idk man, biased is a strong word. Not everything is global, using tricky English is acceptable on a difficult test that is written in English.


It would be acceptable for a test which primarily test one's English ability. But it is not the stated goal of a test.

As an extreme analogy, it would be similar to giving you an IQ test in Mandarin, and measure your IQ based on this test.

User avatar
ScottRiqui
Posts: 3640
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:09 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby ScottRiqui » Mon Sep 30, 2013 2:29 pm

bilbaosan wrote:
Clearly wrote:Idk man, biased is a strong word. Not everything is global, using tricky English is acceptable on a difficult test that is written in English.


It would be acceptable for a test which primarily test one's English ability. But it is not the stated goal of a test.

As an extreme analogy, it would be similar to giving you an IQ test in Mandarin, and measure your IQ based on this test.


Although English proficiency isn't a stated goal of the LSAT, the fact that it's testing logic, reasoning and reading comprehension means that it necessarily requires that the taker know the specific meanings of words, and pay attention to the nuances of the language.

You might be able to come up with something equivalent to the Logic Games section that wouldn't require language proficiency, but I can't imagine a reading comprehension test that isn't going to (justifiably) penalize someone who's fuzzy or imprecise with the language.

User avatar
neprep
Posts: 1066
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 11:16 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby neprep » Mon Sep 30, 2013 2:54 pm

ScottRiqui wrote:
bilbaosan wrote:
Clearly wrote:Idk man, biased is a strong word. Not everything is global, using tricky English is acceptable on a difficult test that is written in English.


It would be acceptable for a test which primarily test one's English ability. But it is not the stated goal of a test.

As an extreme analogy, it would be similar to giving you an IQ test in Mandarin, and measure your IQ based on this test.


Although English proficiency isn't a stated goal of the LSAT, the fact that it's testing logic, reasoning and reading comprehension means that it necessarily requires that the taker know the specific meanings of words, and pay attention to the nuances of the language.

You might be able to come up with something equivalent to the Logic Games section that wouldn't require language proficiency, but I can't imagine a reading comprehension test that isn't going to (justifiably) penalize someone who's fuzzy or imprecise with the language.


Right.

Just as an aside, here is the stated goal:

"The LSAT is designed to measure skills that are considered essential for success in law school: the reading and comprehension of complex texts* with accuracy and insight, the organization and management of information and the ability to draw reasonable inferences from it, the ability to think critically, and the analysis and evaluation of the reasoning and arguments of others."

* Complex texts in English, of course. So actually it isn't ostensibly measuring your language ability, but to the extent that the lack thereof will hinder the "comprehension of complex texts," it is justified in penalizing "fuzzy" skills.

User avatar
Clearly
Posts: 4167
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 4:09 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby Clearly » Mon Sep 30, 2013 4:28 pm

bilbaosan wrote:
Clearly wrote:Idk man, biased notis a strong word. Not everything is global, using tricky English is acceptable on a difficult test that is written in English.


It would be acceptable for a test which primarily test one's English ability. But it is not the stated goal of a test.

As an extreme analogy, it would be similar to giving you an IQ test in Mandarin, and measure your IQ based on this test.

Read the goals posted below, it's not a logic test, hell, there's an entire section titled reading comprehension, it's entirely acceptable to use difficult English language, your whole lsat isn't fair shtick is getting old. Just because it's hard doesn't make it unfair. Everyone in the country takes the same test at the same time, it's the epitome of fair.

bilbaosan
Posts: 108
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:58 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby bilbaosan » Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:11 pm

ScottRiqui wrote:You might be able to come up with something equivalent to the Logic Games section that wouldn't require language proficiency, but I can't imagine a reading comprehension test that isn't going to (justifiably) penalize someone who's fuzzy or imprecise with the language.


A Reading Comprehension test with focus on law (and without the topics which are completely irrelevant for the legal education) would be way more suited to this stated goal.

As I have stated before, I fail to see how the ability to comprehend the topic about medieval Latin poems in 8 minutes could be considered essential for success in law school.

I have the first year textbooks, and I'm half way through the Torts and quarter through the Contracts. Both of them are WAY easier than a typical RC passage.
I also deal with the legal/court documents almost on daily basis. Again comparing to a typical RC passage those are paragons of brevity and clarity. Nobody ever uses the language like you see in some LR questions either.

User avatar
ScottRiqui
Posts: 3640
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:09 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby ScottRiqui » Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:25 pm

bilbaosan wrote:
ScottRiqui wrote:You might be able to come up with something equivalent to the Logic Games section that wouldn't require language proficiency, but I can't imagine a reading comprehension test that isn't going to (justifiably) penalize someone who's fuzzy or imprecise with the language.


A Reading Comprehension test with focus on law (and without the topics which are completely irrelevant for the legal education) would be way more suited to this stated goal.


The test is designed to test aptitude, not knowledge of a specific subject. The density and complexity of the passages is more important than the topic.

Yes, the LSAT is inherently more difficult for people who don't have a firm grasp of English. But that's not really relevant unless there are law schools where the courses aren't taught in English but where the LSAT is still required for admission.

bilbaosan
Posts: 108
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:58 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby bilbaosan » Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:28 pm

Clearly wrote:Everyone in the country takes the same test at the same time, it's the epitome of fair.


Like you have any other choice?

User avatar
Clearly
Posts: 4167
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 4:09 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby Clearly » Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:29 pm

bilbaosan wrote:
ScottRiqui wrote:You might be able to come up with something equivalent to the Logic Games section that wouldn't require language proficiency, but I can't imagine a reading comprehension test that isn't going to (justifiably) penalize someone who's fuzzy or imprecise with the language.


A Reading Comprehension test with focus on law (and without the topics which are completely irrelevant for the legal education) would be way more suited to this stated goal.

As I have stated before, I fail to see how the ability to comprehend the topic about medieval Latin poems in 8 minutes could be considered essential for success in law school.

I have the first year textbooks, and I'm half way through the Torts and quarter through the Contracts. Both of them are WAY easier than a typical RC passage.
I also deal with the legal/court documents almost on daily basis. Again comparing to a typical RC passage those are paragons of brevity and clarity. Nobody ever uses the language like you see in some LR questions either.

And yet, the lsat does correlate with 1L grades... I don't know what to tell you, if you don't like the lsat don't take it...but there's nothing wrong or unfair with it.

bilbaosan
Posts: 108
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:58 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby bilbaosan » Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:35 pm

ScottRiqui wrote:Yes, the LSAT is inherently more difficult for people who don't have a firm grasp of English.


Good. Now do you agree that this extra difficulty tests your English ability (such as vocabulary, phraseology etc) in areas which are familiar to NA college graduates, but which are not relevant for law education?

bilbaosan
Posts: 108
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:58 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby bilbaosan » Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:37 pm

Clearly wrote:And yet, the lsat does correlate with 1L grades...


Do the 1L grades correlate with the success in law school?




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests