Blueprint LSAT Prep's ongoing ask-an-instructor extravaganza Forum

[drawstring]

PT 56 SECTION 2 QUESTION 25

Why isn't the statement in question an intermediate conclusion? It seems like I could take the statement right before it, say and thus= statement in question.

[Clearly]

PT 56 SECTION 2 QUESTION 25

Why isn't the statement in question an intermediate conclusion? It seems like I could take the statement right before it, say and thus= statement in question.

An intermediate conclusion is a conclusion that is both supported by evidence and supports a main conclusion. The first tip off that you are unlikely to see intermediate conclusion is that there are only two sentences. In this format there is generally no room for an intermediate conclusion, as one would have to be the conclusion, and the other would usually be evidence. If you're leaning intermediate conclusion on a question like this just ask yourself two questions
1) Is there evidence supporting this as a conclusion.
2) Does this support another conclusion.
If the answer is yes to both, you have a winner.

Also worth noting that intermediate conclusion isn't an answer choice. The closest thing you have to that is D "Is a claim that is used as direct support for an intermediary conclusion", which basically just means the argument has an intermediary conclusion, but this statement is the evidence that supports a conclusion, and that conclusion goes on to support another main conclusion. That isn't whats happening with this statement.

[drawstring]

Thank you for the response.

I interpreted the part of the sentence immediately before the statement in question as supporting that statement, which lead me to think the statement in question was an intermediary conclusion.

[Clearly]

Thank you for the response.

I interpreted the part of the sentence immediately before the statement in question as supporting that statement, which lead me to think the statement in question was an intermediary conclusion.

In this case, intermediary conclusion isn't an answer choice. It's important to make sure you follow the distinction between an intermediary answer choice, and choice D which is evidence that supports an intermediary conclusion. Good luck and keep working! It's also worth noting that in my experience intermediary conclusion is much more likely to be the correct answer in the historically tougher part of the sections (12-18 or so) because that's typically sort of a trick answer, generally the beginning and ending of the sections are more straightforward with rolr of a statement, although you should never rely on such generalities.

[mvonh001]

How do you recommend i review RC sections that i have completed?

[bp shinners]

How do you recommend i review RC sections that i have completed?

First you should go back and figure out why your answer is wrong (why what you thought supported it in the passage does not, in fact support it) and where in the passage support for the correct answer comes in. You should also note if there were any words in the answer you picked (incorrect) that should have keyed you in - strong language being the main indicator, but equivocating between similar, esoteric terms is a close second.

Then you should evaluate your process. Did you have some type of notation that would have helped for those questions? If so, why didn't it help? If not, what feature of the passage could you have noted to get an answer? Doing this will help you predict important elements of the passage when you go through it in the future.

[lsatkid007]

Hey BP
On Pt21 Sec4 4th passage. In the second paragraph it talks bout F & O conclude that assimilation to US culture increased among Japaneses BUT that a sense of ethnic community endured. After that I'm lost for the entire paragraph. That is very long sentence. Any tips?

Thanks

[bp shinners]

Hey BP
On Pt21 Sec4 4th passage. In the second paragraph it talks bout F & O conclude that assimilation to US culture increased among Japaneses BUT that a sense of ethnic community endured. After that I'm lost for the entire paragraph. That is very long sentence. Any tips?

Thanks

Are you talking about the Tollefson passage? I don't even see where it talks about F&O (?) concluding that, so either you really are lost or I have the wrong passage!

[Chambo]

Shinners,

I've got a question on PT 42, S1 (LG), #5

I made the inference that M cannot be selected. Would I be able to eliminate answers B, C, and D because of this? I hesitated because the answers are in either/or form, so I thought that one of the two need not be able to be selected.

[lsatkid007]

Hey BP
On Pt21 Sec4 4th passage. In the second paragraph it talks bout F & O conclude that assimilation to US culture increased among Japaneses BUT that a sense of ethnic community endured. After that I'm lost for the entire paragraph. That is very long sentence. Any tips?

Thanks

Are you talking about the Tollefson passage? I don't even see where it talks about F&O (?) concluding that, so either you really are lost or I have the wrong passage!

I'm sorry BP it's Pt 23 sec 4 last passage.

[lawschoolplease1]

Hey BP!
Please please help me out with test 35 section 1 LR, Q21.
The paradox is that while this patient is fatigued, the doc doesn't recommend more sleep.
the Q asks to explain.
The answer is worrying can make it more difficult to sleep.
my issue with this is that the answer choice seems to assume that the patient would worry, no?

thanks!

[bp shinners]

Shinners,

I've got a question on PT 42, S1 (LG), #5

I made the inference that M cannot be selected. Would I be able to eliminate answers B, C, and D because of this? I hesitated because the answers are in either/or form, so I thought that one of the two need not be able to be selected.

You were correct in your hesitation. They still could be the correct answer if the other one HAS TO be selected. So "F or else M" would be true if F is always selected and M is never selected.

[bp shinners]

Hey BP
On Pt21 Sec4 4th passage. In the second paragraph it talks bout F & O conclude that assimilation to US culture increased among Japaneses BUT that a sense of ethnic community endured. After that I'm lost for the entire paragraph. That is very long sentence. Any tips?

Thanks

Are you talking about the Tollefson passage? I don't even see where it talks about F&O (?) concluding that, so either you really are lost or I have the wrong passage!

I'm sorry BP it's Pt 23 sec 4 last passage.

Ah, there's the issue - my copy of that PT is missing the passage itself. I'll see if I can dig up a copy.

[bp shinners]

Hey BP!
Please please help me out with test 35 section 1 LR, Q21.
The paradox is that while this patient is fatigued, the doc doesn't recommend more sleep.
the Q asks to explain.
The answer is worrying can make it more difficult to sleep.
my issue with this is that the answer choice seems to assume that the patient would worry, no?

thanks!

Here, the patient is obviously troubled by their lack of sleep and fatigue (they complained about it). Telling them to sleep would make them want to do it. The patient would therefore be concerned about getting enough sleep. That's enough for me to conclude that they'd be worried about it, and it explains why the doctor would not recommend more sleep even if the patient needs it.

In general, Resolve/Explain questions are going to be closer to "most strongly supported" questions in that there are some small jumps/a bit of wiggle room in the answers. So you're right that you're making that assumption, but it's a good assumption to be making based on the info provided, and it does resolve the discrepancy.

[lawschoolplease1]

Hey BP!
Please please help me out with test 35 section 1 LR, Q21.
The paradox is that while this patient is fatigued, the doc doesn't recommend more sleep.
the Q asks to explain.
The answer is worrying can make it more difficult to sleep.
my issue with this is that the answer choice seems to assume that the patient would worry, no?

thanks!

Here, the patient is obviously troubled by their lack of sleep and fatigue (they complained about it). Telling them to sleep would make them want to do it. The patient would therefore be concerned about getting enough sleep. That's enough for me to conclude that they'd be worried about it, and it explains why the doctor would not recommend more sleep even if the patient needs it.

In general, Resolve/Explain questions are going to be closer to "most strongly supported" questions in that there are some small jumps/a bit of wiggle room in the answers. So you're right that you're making that assumption, but it's a good assumption to be making based on the info provided, and it does resolve the discrepancy.

Thanks BP!
It seems as though I'm always too picky (if that's the right word).
I am over careful with assumptions.... do you have any advice on when assumptions are OK and when they're a big no no?

[bp shinners]

It seems as though I'm always too picky (if that's the right word).
I am over careful with assumptions.... do you have any advice on when assumptions are OK and when they're a big no no?

In general, you're right to be concerned. However, in Resolve/Explain questions, there's usually a little room for assumptions. So I'd lower my concern for those.

For the LSAT, there are only a few "good" assumptions, which aren't really assumptions but some people might disagree with them so...:
1) Voting/democracy is good
2) Pollution is bad
If I think of any others, I'll add them to the list.

[CardozoLaw09]

Hey BP,

SuperPrep B - RC, passage 3, Number 20

I'm not seeing how B is a better answer than C. The author in the passage speaks about the tension between the two movements, namely cosmopolitanism and nativism and how it's a "challenge" (line 54) reconciling the two. So I thought "reluctant acceptance" was better than "general approval" because the latter is a more positive spin on things but the tone of the passage suggests a friction between the two movements. Thanks for your help

[PotenC]

Hi BP,

Do you have any advice for the RC section? I did PrepTest 58 today and it has the been the first time in a long while that my score dipped below a 170, since I missed a whopping 7 questions on the RC section. I've read that RC section has gotten more difficult over the past couple of years, and it has kind of destroyed my confidence.

I've been drilling for RC with the Cambridge packets for PTs 1-40, and I've been doing well on those, but I fear that might be because they're easier passages than the ones I'll ultimately be exposed to in 3 weeks. Are there any tactics I can learn to utilize with less than a month left?

Thanks in advance.

[bp shinners]

Hey BP,

SuperPrep B - RC, passage 3, Number 20

I'm not seeing how B is a better answer than C. The author in the passage speaks about the tension between the two movements, namely cosmopolitanism and nativism and how it's a "challenge" (line 54) reconciling the two. So I thought "reluctant acceptance" was better than "general approval" because the latter is a more positive spin on things but the tone of the passage suggests a friction between the two movements. Thanks for your help

I actually don't have a copy of the SuperPrep, so I don't have that passage available. However, from what I know of the LSAT, even if combining the two would be a challenge, if the author ends up saying it would be a good thing, then you have to go with "general approval." "Reluctant acceptance" doesn't mean the author thinks it would be difficult; it means she thinks that it has some downsides that are marginally outweighed by the upsides.

[melmoththewanderer]

Hey bp! I have a few specific RC questions out of PT58 (Section 2).

Q1 I was stuck between B, C and D. I can see how C has too narrow a scope, but what is wrong with D?
Q12 How does this answer choice strengthen the argument? And how do the the other 4 fail to strengthen the argument?
Q19 Can you explain how "ownership transference" can be compatible with tangible-object theory if the theorists allege that ownership is typically retained by the original owner?

[bp shinners]

Do you have any advice for the RC section? I did PrepTest 58 today and it has the been the first time in a long while that my score dipped below a 170, since I missed a whopping 7 questions on the RC section. I've read that RC section has gotten more difficult over the past couple of years, and it has kind of destroyed my confidence.

People always say this, and I just don't see it. RC has changed, for sure, but I don't think it's become more difficult. To me, it's actually easier now for three reasons:
1) Comparative reading. You will have one of these passages. Most of my students find these passages easier than the other ones.
2) Fewer passages that are helped by specialized knowledge. Sure, it was great to get a passage on a topic with which you were familiar. But it sucked when everyone else was familiar with the topic and you weren't. Recently, I've been seeing more passages that are so esoteric/obscure that no one reading it really has a leg up. That evens the field.
3) Tighter answer choices. The questions have become LR-esque in how tight they are with the wording. This means that you should be better able to eliminate the incorrect answer and pick the correct answers based on strategies from LR, and be more certain of your answers than most people think you can be on RC.

Biggest change in strategy I can suggest is to approach each question as an LR question. Type it just as you would in that section. Most will be "Most Strongly Supported"-type questions (including the Main Point question, which should be viewed as a hybrid Main Point/Soft Must Be True ("Most Strongly Supported") question). There will be a smattering of Strengthen/Weaken/Parallel questions. Then a few Role and Organization questions. But use your LR strategies here.

When reviewing passages, don't just find why your answer was wrong and the other answer was right. Figure out what you could have done to quickly answer that question. This usually involves making a new tag on the passage that you didn't the first time through. You don't want every detail that shows up in a question tagged in the passage, but you do want to at least have the paragraph in which it appears tagged so that you could have quickly found that answer choice.

Finally, look at every passage as a progression. X used to be true/what we believed. Y happened. Now we believe Z.

Science:
We used to believe theory X.
Then some scientist did experiment Y.
Now we believe Z.

History:
X was the historical trend.
Then event Y happened.
After that, we saw Z.

Art/Literature:
X was the style at the time.
Then artist/movement Y happened.
Now we have style Z.

It's not universal, but it does apply to a ton of passage. If you understand the differences between X and Z, and you know what Y consists of (not necessarily all the specifics, but at least how it moved us from X to Z), then you should be solid on the RC.

[lawschoolplease1]

It seems as though I'm always too picky (if that's the right word).
I am over careful with assumptions.... do you have any advice on when assumptions are OK and when they're a big no no?

In general, you're right to be concerned. However, in Resolve/Explain questions, there's usually a little room for assumptions. So I'd lower my concern for those.

For the LSAT, there are only a few "good" assumptions, which aren't really assumptions but some people might disagree with them so...:
1) Voting/democracy is good
2) Pollution is bad
If I think of any others, I'll add them to the list.

Thank you!

[bp shinners]

Q1 I was stuck between B, C and D. I can see how C has too narrow a scope, but what is wrong with D?

I know that new techniques have enabled those who investigate textiles to garner more information, but I don't know that it was this research that spurred these sweeping changes in the field of archaeology. It seems like the technology developed and the philosophy changed independent of the desire to research textiles, and then these changes/advances helped out textile research. So when it says "research into...textiles HAS SPURRED...", it's saying too much.

Q12 How does this answer choice strengthen the argument? And how do the the other 4 fail to strengthen the argument?

His prediction is that scientists will increasingly look to nature for solutions to problems.

A - Emeagwali has been successful using nature to get solutions to complex problems. If other scientists haven't been aware that this is possible, then it increases the likelihood that they will increasingly look there in the future. They're not doing it now + one person has had success with it = More likely more will do it in the future.

B - A lack of information as to variables doesn't make it more likely that we'll look to nature to solve other problems.

C - Again, I'm not looking to nature for solutions here.

D - This is just talking about solutions we already have. So we're not looking at new solutions found in nature in the future.

E - Nothing about nature here.

Q19 Can you explain how "ownership transference" can be compatible with tangible-object theory if the theorists allege that ownership is typically retained by the original owner?

"the full complement of rights is NOT NECESSARILY transferred to the new owner." So the full complement doesn't have to be, but at no point does it say they can't be; and it also doesn't say which right are and are not generally transferred. Additionally, when explaining the tangible-object theory in the first paragraph, it says that "[the owner] may essentially do whatever he or she pleases with the object to the extent that this does not violate" the rights of others. If I can do whatever I want with my copyrighted material as long as it doesn't violate someone else's rights, then transferring the right to copy my book to a publisher is perfectly compatible.

[retakerneedshelp]

Hey Matt,

I've been receiving a mix of scores between 161 and 171. My last test (BP Practice Test #4) had a Reding Comp experimental. I missed 2 on the experimental, but 7 on the actual RC section (section 5). Naturally, RC is my weaker spot because of the amount of energy it takes.
Any tips on building stamina in case the real thing has a similar situation with 2 RCs, with one being at the end of the test?

Thanks!

[bp shinners]

Hey Matt,

I've been receiving a mix of scores between 161 and 171. My last test (BP Practice Test #4) had a Reding Comp experimental. I missed 2 on the experimental, but 7 on the actual RC section (section 5). Naturally, RC is my weaker spot because of the amount of energy it takes.
Any tips on building stamina in case the real thing has a similar situation with 2 RCs, with one being at the end of the test?

Thanks!

Only way to build up stamina is to prep for longer than the test's time period. So you'll need to sit down for several hours at a time, without distraction, to get to the point where a five-section test doesn't throw you at the end.

That being said, the last section is always going to drag a bit. Don't feel too bad if you're a bit run-down by then; just make sure it's not to the point where you swing -5.