Jgoods wrote:Ok so I lied... but legit question (for those of you who haven't taken PT 68, Spoiler alert)
So I feel like I overanalyze some LR questions which causes me to eliminate the correct answer and it has happened to me more than once... For instance on PT 68, S3 Q18 I eliminated the correct answer
from manhattan explanation "(E) The move will not be accompanied by a pay raise. I will admit, on my first rundown I thought that this was out of scope. However, when I applied the negation test --> The move WILL be accompanied by a pay raise. If that is the case then the argument falls apart as it destroy the Premise that they cannot afford to live within a 30 minute commute. If there wages are increased then perhaps they can!" I look at that as even if the move accompanied the pay raise, who's to say its enough to allow employees to afford housing within 30mins? since it is a necessary assumption I see that as a flawed assumption that shouldn't be considered "required"
edit: How do I fix this thinking/what should I do to prevent this??
For the negation test, it doesn't have to destroy the argument in the sense that it proves it incorrect, but just the CERTAINTY of it. It is absolutely necessary that the move does not include a pay raise, because if it does, then the argument is no longer air tight.
So Beyonce is at a bar looking all delicious, looking major, major Beyonce. And Ryan Gosling walks in, his biceps glistening with the glow of a god. Now let's say Ryan's spent some time in Europe, and now he can't remember whether Americans wear their wedding rings on their left or right hand. (It's the left.) Ryan heard Bey and Jay were on the outs. Ryan likes it, and he wants to put a ring on it. But first he needs to see if Beyonce has separated from Jay Z...
So, he looks at Bey's hands, and he notices that she's not wearing any ring at all. RYAN GON' GET IT. That's like a sufficient assumption. If she is not wearing any ring, that means she has separated from Jay for absolute certainty. It is more than we need, because just her not having one on her left would be good enough.
But, instead, say that Bey is wearing a ring on her left. UH-OH NO GO. Failure to launch. We have just flunked the necessary assumption. The necessary assumption is that she is not wearing a ring on her left. She can be wearing a ring on her right hand, but that doesn't mean anything in America.
Exhibit A: Ryan Godsling
Figure 1.1: Beyonce be Ready
Figure 1.2: Beyonce is Married
Originally this was an epic tale about me and the Colonel but then it got to be too risque and after all my edits, I'm not even sure it is at all helpful in explaining SA and NA. But I spent a good ten minutes on this, so enjoy. Bed time story. Bill, please edit to make this make LSAT sense. Save it from meaninglessness.
Also I have officially lost my shit, but I am just going to go with it.