Distinguishing between Main Conclusion & Sub-Conclusion?

chicagocubsrule
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 11:25 pm

Distinguishing between Main Conclusion & Sub-Conclusion?

Postby chicagocubsrule » Tue Feb 26, 2008 11:31 pm

When encountering complex arguments, I can't always distinguish between the main conclusion and the subsidiary conclusion. Other then the fact that the sub-conclusion will act as a premise for the main conclusion, is there anything else I should know to help me make this distinction?

User avatar
EricC/O'11
Posts: 30
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 3:10 am

Re: Distinguishing between Main Conclusion & Sub-Conclusion?

Postby EricC/O'11 » Tue Feb 26, 2008 11:41 pm

Typically subsidiary conclusions have a more restrictive scope than the main conclusion. The sub conclusion may have some elements of the premises, but not all. Try and decipher which conclusion is the most sweeping, and that will most likely be your overall conclusion.

MLBrandow
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 5:12 pm

Re: Distinguishing between Main Conclusion & Sub-Conclusion?

Postby MLBrandow » Wed Feb 27, 2008 2:23 am

chicagocubsrule,

In Logical Reasoning, generally whenever a stimulus contains two conclusions, the MC vs. SC concept is tested. In most cases, the subsidiary conclusion is the last sentence in the stimulus and preceded by "Thus," "Therefore," or another conclusion indicator. Be on the lookout, and think like a test maker! When in doubt, go with the first one by frequency.

User avatar
n4sir1999
Posts: 92
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 7:57 pm

Re: Distinguishing between Main Conclusion & Sub-Conclusion?

Postby n4sir1999 » Wed Feb 27, 2008 3:09 am

MLBrandow wrote:chicagocubsrule,
In most cases, the subsidiary conclusion is the last sentence in the stimulus and preceded by "Thus," "Therefore," or another conclusion indicator. Be on the lookout, and think like a test maker! When in doubt, go with the first one by frequency.


Don't you mean main conclusion is generally the last sentence in the stimulus...

User avatar
LSATonMe
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2007 5:22 pm

Re: Distinguishing between Main Conclusion & Sub-Conclusion?

Postby LSATonMe » Wed Feb 27, 2008 10:11 am

i think he did mean the SC is in the last sentence, preceded by a conclusion indicator, generally when they test the SC vs MC a.k.a. role, MOR-AP etc. I agree that this is generally the case, but caution to make any definitive rules.

When they are NOT testing this type, this is generally not the case in the STIM. Again, certainly not always the rule in either case.

n4sir1999 wrote:
MLBrandow wrote:chicagocubsrule,
In most cases, the subsidiary conclusion is the last sentence in the stimulus and preceded by "Thus," "Therefore," or another conclusion indicator. Be on the lookout, and think like a test maker! When in doubt, go with the first one by frequency.


Don't you mean main conclusion is generally the last sentence in the stimulus...

the_assassin
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 6:25 pm

Re: Distinguishing between Main Conclusion & Sub-Conclusion?

Postby the_assassin » Wed Feb 27, 2008 3:10 pm

As discussed previously, the premise supports the conclusion, hence
the arrow from the premise to the conclusion. By comparison, a
complex argument takes an initial conclusion and then uses it as a
premise for another conclusion:

Conclusion

Conclusion/Premise

Premise


This is from the Logical reasoning bible. Hope this helps.

User avatar
idrinkcoffee
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 12:12 pm

Re: Distinguishing between Main Conclusion & Sub-Conclusion?

Postby idrinkcoffee » Wed Feb 27, 2008 9:05 pm

I always ask myself:
Is this BEING SUPPORTED by something? (A conclusion must be supported by something else in the argument. Otherwise it's just a fact/premise.)
Is this SUPPORTING something else? (The conclusion will never support another fact.)

If it does both, it's an intermediate conclusion. :)

User avatar
rmyoun06
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2008 1:08 pm

Re: Distinguishing between Main Conclusion & Sub-Conclusion?

Postby rmyoun06 » Wed Feb 27, 2008 11:05 pm

chicagocubsrule wrote:When encountering complex arguments, I can't always distinguish between the main conclusion and the subsidiary conclusion. Other then the fact that the sub-conclusion will act as a premise for the main conclusion, is there anything else I should know to help me make this distinction?


Honestly, I'm not sure what this even means, exactly. I've never heard this terminology before.

chicagocubsrule
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 11:25 pm

Re: Distinguishing between Main Conclusion & Sub-Conclusion?

Postby chicagocubsrule » Thu Feb 28, 2008 2:43 am

Thanks guys for the insightful responses.

User avatar
aquarium_drinker
Posts: 52
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2007 5:55 pm

Re: Distinguishing between Main Conclusion & Sub-Conclusion?

Postby aquarium_drinker » Thu Feb 28, 2008 3:08 am

idrinkcoffee wrote:I always ask myself:
Is this BEING SUPPORTED by something? (A conclusion must be supported by something else in the argument. Otherwise it's just a fact/premise.)
Is this SUPPORTING something else? (The conclusion will never support another fact.)

If it does both, it's an intermediate conclusion. :)


Testmasters?

This rule of thumb has been useful for me.

User avatar
blhblahblah
Posts: 170
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 10:54 pm

Re: Distinguishing between Main Conclusion & Sub-Conclusion?

Postby blhblahblah » Thu Feb 28, 2008 5:59 pm

use the WHY/BECAUSE TEST

if it doesn't make sense, swap and try again.

User avatar
jesuis
Posts: 42
Joined: Sat Jul 25, 2009 4:56 am

Re: Distinguishing between Main Conclusion & Sub-Conclusion?

Postby jesuis » Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:25 am

LSATonMe wrote:i think he did mean the SC is in the last sentence, preceded by a conclusion indicator, generally when they test the SC vs MC a.k.a. role, MOR-AP etc. I agree that this is generally the case, but caution to make any definitive rules.

When they are NOT testing this type, this is generally not the case in the STIM. Again, certainly not always the rule in either case.

n4sir1999 wrote:
MLBrandow wrote:chicagocubsrule,
In most cases, the subsidiary conclusion is the last sentence in the stimulus and preceded by "Thus," "Therefore," or another conclusion indicator. Be on the lookout, and think like a test maker! When in doubt, go with the first one by frequency.


Don't you mean main conclusion is generally the last sentence in the stimulus...


Can someone please clarify what MOR-AP and STIM stand for? and give any relvant info regarding their effect/relationship with Sub-Conclusion and Main-Conclusion?

Robert398
Posts: 55
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2008 12:05 am

Re: Distinguishing between Main Conclusion & Sub-Conclusion?

Postby Robert398 » Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:51 am

The subsidiary conclusion will act as a premise for the main conclusion - the main conclusion is often not the last sentence in the stimulus, precisely to see whether you are able to distinguish between a SC and a MC when they are not in intuitive order (i.e. when the SC does not come before the MC in terms of order in the stimulus).




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 34iplaw, anervouslsater, Greenteachurro, harveybirdman502, Yahoo [Bot] and 10 guests