67.lr1.10 Forum

[appind]

this is a "disagree" question.

the first speaker Annie never says that students are not responsible for the current conditions. She only says that administrators are. then how can Annie provably agree with D?
for D to be credited Annie must think that students are responsible, but that can't be proved based on the stim.

since this is a must-be-true (MBT) disagree question, it seems the answer must be fully supported instead of softly supported. it seems D can be credited only if it were a soft "most likely disagree" question instead of a hard disagree question.

[youngwarrior]

this is a "disagree" question.

the first speaker Annie never says that students are not responsible for the current conditions. She only says that administrators are. then how can Annie provably agree with D?
for D to be credited Annie must think that students are responsible, but that can't be proved based on the stim.

since this is a must-be-true (MBT) disagree question, it seems the answer must be fully supported instead of softly supported. it seems D can be credited only if it were a soft "most likely disagree" question instead of a hard disagree question.

as you probably know for disagree questions you want to identify the point of overlap between both agents, because in order for them to disagree on something they both need to have an opinion on it. wrong answer choices will usually only include points/statements that are unique to one of the agents.

(A) if we assume "library administrators" "library officials" and "university administrators" are intertanchangable then we could argue that the two women agree on this. If not, we could eliminate this on the basis that it is unique to matilda's argument as she mentions "library officials" whereas annie talks about university administrators.
(B) this position is unique to annie's argument, eliminate.
(C) this is not a position that is advanced by either of the agents, eliminate.
(D) correct.
While Annie doesn't explicitly state that the students are not responsible for the library's current conditions, it is implied when she assigns culpability to the university's administrators.
the point at issue is who should bear the cost of ameliorating the libraries current conditions
annie argues that the students (who were not responsible) should by paying a library fee why? because it is the most expeditious and effective way of doing so, matilda says this should not be the case why? because the students are not responsible for the current conditions
(E) not a position advanced by either agent, eliminate.

[appind]

While Annie doesn't explicitly state that the students are not responsible for the library's current conditions, it is implied when she assigns culpability to the university's administrators.

usually assigning blame to X doesn't imply that Y isn't to blame.

this is an MBT disagree question, so Annie must provably agree with D and D must be properly inferrable from Annie, not just implied.

[youngwarrior]

While Annie doesn't explicitly state that the students are not responsible for the library's current conditions, it is implied when she assigns culpability to the university's administrators.

usually assigning blame to X doesn't imply that Y isn't to blame.

this is an MBT disagree question, so Annie must provably agree with D and D must be properly inferrable from Annie, not just implied.

you're right, i should have been more clear.

The goal of the question is to identify the point of overlap between both agents so you identify the point at issue. The phrase "those not responsible for the current situation" is a referential phrase referring to the students. Matilda explicitly says that the students are not responsible for the current situation and therefore should not pay, Annie disagrees. Assuming that statements/premises ect.. are true as you are supposed to do on the lsat, we can ascertain that the students are not responsible for the current damage because matilda says it in her argument, so whether annie thinks the students are responsible is completely irrelevant, we know for a fact that it's true. It's okay for a correct answer choice to contain something that was discussed by one agent ( such as matilda's contention that are students not being responsible for the current condition), as long as it is related the point at issue (who should pay). The issue isn't who is responsible, (so it's not necessary to ascertain whether annie thinks the students are also responsible) it's who should pay.

remember, the only thing you are EVER supposed to be critical about on the lsat is the validity of the arguments, not the veracity of the statements that the arguments are composed of.

[appind]

whether annie thinks the students are responsible is completely irrelevant, we know for a fact that it's true. It's okay for a correct answer choice to contain something that was discussed by one agent ( such as matilda's contention that are students not being responsible for the current condition), as long as it is related the point at issue (who should pay). The issue isn't who is responsible, (so it's not necessary to ascertain whether annie thinks the students are also responsible) it's who should pay.

remember, the only thing you are EVER supposed to be critical about on the lsat is the validity of the arguments, not the veracity of the statements that the arguments are composed of.

well, afaik the bolded isn't necessarily true. for the two speakers to provably disagree with D, we must know that annie provably agrees with D. the issue is who should pay, but D does talk about "who" it is who should pay in that those who aren't responsible should pay. for annie to agree with D it must be inferrable from her statements that "those not responsible should pay."

you're right that you take lsat premises as true, but a premise for one speaker isn't granted true for another speaker. these two speakers are expected to disagree like some comparative passages, so there is no sense in thinking that the premises of one speaker must hold true for another even though the other speaker doesn't mention it.

[youngwarrior]

whether annie thinks the students are responsible is completely irrelevant, we know for a fact that it's true. It's okay for a correct answer choice to contain something that was discussed by one agent ( such as matilda's contention that are students not being responsible for the current condition), as long as it is related the point at issue (who should pay). The issue isn't who is responsible, (so it's not necessary to ascertain whether annie thinks the students are also responsible) it's who should pay.

remember, the only thing you are EVER supposed to be critical about on the lsat is the validity of the arguments, not the veracity of the statements that the arguments are composed of.

well, afaik the bolded isn't necessarily true. for the two speakers to provably disagree with D, we must know that annie provably agrees with D. the issue is who should pay, but D does talk about "who" it is who should pay in that those who aren't responsible should pay. for annie to agree with D it must be inferrable from her statements that "those not responsible should pay."

you're right that you take lsat premises as true, but a premise for one speaker isn't granted true for another speaker. these two speakers are expected to disagree like some comparative passages, so there is no sense in thinking that the premises of one speaker must hold true for another even though the other speaker doesn't mention it.

but the bolded is true. Whether the students are indeed responsible is relevant insofar as matilda's argument is concerned, because it's used to substantiate her conclusion and has nothing to do with annie's reasoning. it is not necessary for one agent to address, i.e., agree or disagree with the premises of the other agent's argument in order one is to ascertain what the point of issue if it pertains to the main point of each agent as it does in this case. you're right that the truth of a premise of one speaker does not mean it holds true for another speaker, but if annie refuted matilda's contention that the students are responsible then (D) would not necessarily be the credited response, rather, whoever is responsible would be a point of disagreement as well.


It helps to draw a map:

Annie:
Who should pay for improvements: Students
Who is responsible: University administrators
Who is not responsible: N/A

Who should pay for improvements: Not Students
Who is responsible: University/library administrators
Who is not responsible: Students

The only point of overlap is over who should pay for improvements, annie makes doesn't talk about who is not responsible and she doesn't need to, because in order for them to disagree over something, they both need to have an opinion on it, the reasoning for reaching the point is not relevant insofar as there is no overlap.

The point is, you are incorrect in thinking that we need to know what Annie thinks about the culpability of the students as to the library's deterioration, we don't. Like I said, it's perfectly fine for a correct answer choice to contain something that was unique to one of the agent's arguments (whether the students are responsible) as along as it's related to the point at issue (who should pay).

[appind]

It helps to draw a map:

Annie:
Who should pay for improvements: Students
Who is responsible: University administrators
Who is not responsible: N/A

Who should pay for improvements: Not Students
Who is responsible: University/library administrators
Who is not responsible: Students

The only point of overlap is over who should pay for improvements, annie makes doesn't talk about who is not responsible and she doesn't need to, because in order for them to disagree over something, they both need to have an opinion on it, the reasoning for reaching the point is not relevant insofar as there is no overlap.

The point is, you are incorrect in thinking that we need to know what Annie thinks about the culpability of the students as to the library's deterioration, we don't. Like I said, it's perfectly fine for a correct answer choice to contain something that was unique to one of the agent's arguments (whether the students are responsible) as along as it's related to the point at issue (who should pay).

the only point of overlap is who should pay for improvements, one says students another not-students.
choice X: students should bear the cost of fixing library

Annie would say yes to the above choice and Matilda would say no. so this is a provable point of disagreement. one speaker answers yes to the choice and the other one answers no to the choice.

you agree that for a statement on which two people provably disagree, their response to the statement must be 1 "yes" and 1 "no"?
if both of them answer the same way, or if one's response is not determinable as yes or no, then the statement can't be a point of disagreement.



choice-D is: those not responsible for deterioration should bear the cost

we know Matilda would say "no" to this choice per your map.
but we don't know if Annie would say "yes" or "no" to this, because we don't know who according to Annie is "not responsible" (Annie: Who is not responsible: N/A). if we don't know who Annie thinks is "not responsible" (the subject of the sentence in choice-D) then how can we know if she would say yes/ or no to "those not responsible should pay".
since we don't know if Annie would say yes or no, we can't provably say they disagree.

[youngwarrior]

It helps to draw a map:

Annie:
Who should pay for improvements: Students
Who is responsible: University administrators
Who is not responsible: N/A

Who should pay for improvements: Not Students
Who is responsible: University/library administrators
Who is not responsible: Students

The only point of overlap is over who should pay for improvements, annie makes doesn't talk about who is not responsible and she doesn't need to, because in order for them to disagree over something, they both need to have an opinion on it, the reasoning for reaching the point is not relevant insofar as there is no overlap.

The point is, you are incorrect in thinking that we need to know what Annie thinks about the culpability of the students as to the library's deterioration, we don't. Like I said, it's perfectly fine for a correct answer choice to contain something that was unique to one of the agent's arguments (whether the students are responsible) as along as it's related to the point at issue (who should pay).

the only point of overlap is who should pay for improvements, one says students another not-students.
choice X: students should bear the cost of fixing library

Annie would say yes to the above choice and Matilda would say no. so this is a provable point of disagreement. one speaker answers yes to the choice and the other one answers no to the choice.

you agree that for a statement on which two people provably disagree, their response to the statement must be 1 "yes" and 1 "no"?
if both of them answer the same way, or if one's response is not determinable as yes or no, then the statement can't be a point of disagreement.



choice-D is: those not responsible for deterioration should bear the cost

we know Matilda would say "no" to this choice per your map.
but we don't know if Annie would say "yes" or "no" to this, because we don't know who according to Annie is "not responsible" (Annie: Who is not responsible: N/A). if we don't know who Annie thinks is "not responsible" (the subject of the sentence in choice-D) then how can we know if she would say yes/ or no to "those not responsible should pay".
since we don't know if Annie would say yes or no, we can't provably say they disagree.

Because maltilda says they are responsible and we need to take it as a truth. Annie doesn't comment on it and she doesn't need to. I'm right and clearly those at LSAC agree.

You gotta pick the best answer and this is clearly the best one, all the others are unequivocally wrong. there is nothing i can say that will fully convince you that Annie believes that students bear no responsibility, because she doesn't mention students nor does she use extreme restrictive terms like "the only people responsible" ect.. but if we just use our common sense, we can see that nnie says that libraries are in bad shape, describes two examples of how, and says that the university's administrators should admit that their library policies have been in error. so it sounds to me like annie thinks that the library officials are responsible for the current situation and we can safely assume that annie doesn't think students are responsible for how many new books have been purchased during the last decade.

[appind]

Because maltilda says they are responsible and we need to take it as a truth. Annie doesn't comment on it and she doesn't need to. I'm right and clearly those at LSAC agree.

You gotta pick the best answer and this is clearly the best one, all the others are unequivocally wrong. there is nothing i can say that will fully convince you that Annie believes that students bear no responsibility, because she doesn't mention students nor does she use extreme restrictive terms like "the only people responsible" ect.. but if we just use our common sense, we can see that nnie says that libraries are in bad shape, describes two examples of how, and says that the university's administrators should admit that their library policies have been in error. so it sounds to me like annie thinks that the library officials are responsible for the current situation and we can safely assume that annie doesn't think students are responsible for how many new books have been purchased during the last decade.

recap
first you explained tcr by saying annie implies students not responsible
in a later post you modified it to say whether annie thinks students responsible or not is irrelevant
later you modified it to say that student not responsible is a premise for annie even tho it's a premise only for the second speaker
looks like trying to fit an explanation when there isn't a good one considering annie must definitely be able to answer yes for D
it's useful discussion though.

i picked this q from manhattan forum because there wasn't a good explanation but it looks like you just copied the mlsat explanation trying to prove you're right lol. for many though it's not just being right but knowing why you're right is important.

in any case, for what it's worth i think this is the only definitely MBT disagree q that i have seen in almost all preptests where tcr isn't provable. all other MBT disagree qs (different from most likely disagree) by lsac are such that speakers provably disagree.

[youngwarrior]

Because maltilda says they are responsible and we need to take it as a truth. Annie doesn't comment on it and she doesn't need to. I'm right and clearly those at LSAC agree.

You gotta pick the best answer and this is clearly the best one, all the others are unequivocally wrong. there is nothing i can say that will fully convince you that Annie believes that students bear no responsibility, because she doesn't mention students nor does she use extreme restrictive terms like "the only people responsible" ect.. but if we just use our common sense, we can see that nnie says that libraries are in bad shape, describes two examples of how, and says that the university's administrators should admit that their library policies have been in error. so it sounds to me like annie thinks that the library officials are responsible for the current situation and we can safely assume that annie doesn't think students are responsible for how many new books have been purchased during the last decade.

recap
first you explained tcr by saying annie implies students not responsible
in a later post you modified it to say whether annie thinks students responsible or not is irrelevant
later you modified it to say that student not responsible is a premise for annie even tho it's a premise only for the second speaker
looks like trying to fit an explanation when there isn't a good one considering annie must definitely be able to answer yes for D
it's useful discussion though.

i picked this q from manhattan forum because there wasn't a good explanation but it looks like you just copied the mlsat explanation trying to prove you're right lol. for many though it's not just being right but knowing why you're right is important.

in any case, for what it's worth i think this is the only definitely MBT disagree q that i have seen in almost all preptests where tcr isn't provable. all other MBT disagree qs (different from most likely disagree) by lsac are such that speakers provably disagree.

my last post was a synopsis of the MLSAT explanation, and nothing in that post mentions anything that i never mentioned in my previous posts, it's actually a recap of all my responses so all it does is consolidate the points are already made which is why i included it, so it has nothing to do with "trying to prove that i'm right".

like i said previously, we can surmise that annie thinks the students are not responsible and then i added that whether or not she thinks they are is irrelevant anyways, but the latter doesn't negate the veracity of the former. the last explanation was a typo, i meant to say it was an explanation for the other speaker, i was late and severely sleep deprived.

i agree that this question is a weird one, while it's imperative that you are able to confirm the right answer, being able to clearly eliminate the other answer choices just as important. there are two independently sufficient ways to arrive at the right answer choice: one is to identify the right answer choice and to confirm it, the other is by identifying the incorrect answer choices by articulating a valid reason for why they are wrong, you should really be doing both, but in my view the latter method would be more effective as far as this question is concerned, especially if you are running short on time. i remember writing this pt back when i was studying for the lsat and i used poe when i came across this question and got the it right, i spent no more than 30-40 seconds on it.