Top Law Schools

If we look to the conclusion for the scope of the answer when we eliminate answer choices, then what role does the premise play in finding the answer?? (From a theoretical perspective) Not really struggling with anything, just curious?

..

zacboro wrote:I'm not sure I quite understand your question, but if I do understand it correctly. The premise is connected in that Premise = P, Conclusion = C, and the assumption is X. Assumption questions ask us to identify X when P + X = C . Basically, P and C are stated explicitly in the stimulus, and the ACs are the assumption, only one of the answer choices will give you X. Note: in some stimulus there could be more than one P or C.

Don't know If you're taking the question as me referring to assumption questions only, but if you are, that's not exactly what I'm referring to. So in any assumption family argument whether it be Necessary, strengthen, weaken, suffucient, flawed, what have you.....we're told to figure out the gap. As in the the evidence and conclusion....after we find the gap, we Prephrase the answer and then look for the accredited answer. In doing so we we have to make sure to look for an answer choice that falls within the scope of the conclusion, but that gap also supplies not only the conclusion, but the evidence as well. My question is what role does the evidence play in finding the accredited answer?

ltowns1 wrote:

zacboro wrote:I'm not sure I quite understand your question, but if I do understand it correctly. The premise is connected in that Premise = P, Conclusion = C, and the assumption is X. Assumption questions ask us to identify X when P + X = C . Basically, P and C are stated explicitly in the stimulus, and the ACs are the assumption, only one of the answer choices will give you X. Note: in some stimulus there could be more than one P or C.

Don't know If you're taking the question as me referring to assumption questions only, but if you are, that's not exactly what I'm referring to. So in any assumption family argument whether it be Necessary, strengthen, weaken, suffucient, flawed, what have you.....we're told to figure out the gap. As in the the evidence and conclusion....after we find the gap, we Prephrase the answer and then look for the accredited answer. In doing so we we have to make sure to look for an answer choice that falls within the scope of the conclusion, but that gap also supplies not only the conclusion, but the evidence as well. My question is what role does the evidence play in finding the accredited answer?

Assuming (see the irony? haha) that evidence and premise are the same thing in your second post and that I understand the question...

The role the premise plays is sort of as one side of the bridge, right? Sure, the conclusion is the bigger one but the premise matters as well. Also, premises become HUGE when there is an intermediate conclusion (A --> B --> Conclusion). Sometimes in questions like this, which are normally on the more difficult end of the spectrum, the assumption doesn't even concern the conclusion. The correct answer could very well be getting from A to B, and neither side of the "bridge" is actual conclusion. A simple example of this could be:

"The best team will win the Super Bowl. Because the Seahawks have the best player on the field, Richard Sherman, they are the best team. Therefore, the Seahawks will win the Super Bowl."

Diagrammed: Seahawks have best player --> Seahawks have best team, and the best team will win the Super Bowl --> Seahawks will win Super Bowl.

Here, the conclusion is that the Hawks are winning on Sunday. But when you look for the assumption, you actually won't use the conclusion- for the purposes of this question it is irrelevant. Instead, its between 2 premises (well, one premise and one intermediate conclusion).

Assumption: Having the best player means you have the best team.

In a question like this, a complete understanding of the premises is absolutely ESSENTIAL. If you fixate only on the conclusion, you're missing the answer.

Hope that answers your question, and hope I understood what you were asking correctly!

EDIT: Just reread your original post. So basically, in a question like this, you CANNOT just use the conclusion for scope. In fact, you can only use premises.

Not sure if this is redundant but just wanted to add a comment that might be helpful --

One thing to consider is that the right answer for assumption family questions (boy, haven't typed that phrase in a long time) will relate to the relationship between the premise(s) and the conclusion -- how the support is being used to justify the point being made. A flaw answer will reveal something not just about the point being made, but rather the relationship between the point and the support, a strengthen the argument answer will not just strengthen the conclusion, but instead will specifically strengthen the relationship between the support and conclusion, a necessary assumption is defined as something required for the relationship between support and conclusion, and so on.

So, if you evaluate and eliminate answers just based on conclusion, you aren't giving yourself as clear a gauge as you would be if you were evaluating them in terms how they impact the relationship between premise(s) and point, and that's why premises are important during the answer evaluation process. HTH.

The LSAT Trainer wrote:Not sure if this is redundant but just wanted to add a comment that might be helpful --

One thing to consider is that the right answer for assumption family questions (boy, haven't typed that phrase in a long time) will relate to the relationship between the premise(s) and the conclusion -- how the support is being used to justify the point being made. A flaw answer will reveal something not just about the point being made, but rather the relationship between the point and the support, a strengthen the argument answer will not just strengthen the conclusion, but instead will specifically strengthen the relationship between the support and conclusion, a necessary assumption is defined as something required for the relationship between support and conclusion, and so on.

So, if you evaluate and eliminate answers just based on conclusion, you aren't giving yourself as clear a gauge as you would be if you were evaluating them in terms how they impact the relationship between premise(s) and point, and that's why premises are important during the answer evaluation process. HTH.

You guys all answered the question, espeically lsat trainer. Thanks

jetsfan1 wrote:

ltowns1 wrote:

zacboro wrote:I'm not sure I quite understand your question, but if I do understand it correctly. The premise is connected in that Premise = P, Conclusion = C, and the assumption is X. Assumption questions ask us to identify X when P + X = C . Basically, P and C are stated explicitly in the stimulus, and the ACs are the assumption, only one of the answer choices will give you X. Note: in some stimulus there could be more than one P or C.

Don't know If you're taking the question as me referring to assumption questions only, but if you are, that's not exactly what I'm referring to. So in any assumption family argument whether it be Necessary, strengthen, weaken, suffucient, flawed, what have you.....we're told to figure out the gap. As in the the evidence and conclusion....after we find the gap, we Prephrase the answer and then look for the accredited answer. In doing so we we have to make sure to look for an answer choice that falls within the scope of the conclusion, but that gap also supplies not only the conclusion, but the evidence as well. My question is what role does the evidence play in finding the accredited answer?

Assuming (see the irony? haha) that evidence and premise are the same thing in your second post and that I understand the question...

The role the premise plays is sort of as one side of the bridge, right? Sure, the conclusion is the bigger one but the premise matters as well. Also, premises become HUGE when there is an intermediate conclusion (A --> B --> Conclusion). Sometimes in questions like this, which are normally on the more difficult end of the spectrum, the assumption doesn't even concern the conclusion. The correct answer could very well be getting from A to B, and neither side of the "bridge" is actual conclusion. A simple example of this could be:

"The best team will win the Super Bowl. Because the Seahawks have the best player on the field, Richard Sherman, they are the best team. Therefore, the Seahawks will win the Super Bowl."

Diagrammed: Seahawks have best player --> Seahawks have best team, and the best team will win the Super Bowl --> Seahawks will win Super Bowl.

Here, the conclusion is that the Hawks are winning on Sunday. But when you look for the assumption, you actually won't use the conclusion- for the purposes of this question it is irrelevant. Instead, its between 2 premises (well, one premise and one intermediate conclusion).

Assumption: Having the best player means you have the best team.

In a question like this, a complete understanding of the premises is absolutely ESSENTIAL. If you fixate only on the conclusion, you're missing the answer.

Hope that answers your question, and hope I understood what you were asking correctly!

EDIT: Just reread your original post. So basically, in a question like this, you CANNOT just use the conclusion for scope. In fact, you can only use premises.

Yep ur assumption was right lol, and thanks you understood the question....you suck tho because u sound like a Seahawks fan lol jk..thanks.

ltowns1 wrote:

jetsfan1 wrote:

ltowns1 wrote:

zacboro wrote:I'm not sure I quite understand your question, but if I do understand it correctly. The premise is connected in that Premise = P, Conclusion = C, and the assumption is X. Assumption questions ask us to identify X when P + X = C . Basically, P and C are stated explicitly in the stimulus, and the ACs are the assumption, only one of the answer choices will give you X. Note: in some stimulus there could be more than one P or C.

Don't know If you're taking the question as me referring to assumption questions only, but if you are, that's not exactly what I'm referring to. So in any assumption family argument whether it be Necessary, strengthen, weaken, suffucient, flawed, what have you.....we're told to figure out the gap. As in the the evidence and conclusion....after we find the gap, we Prephrase the answer and then look for the accredited answer. In doing so we we have to make sure to look for an answer choice that falls within the scope of the conclusion, but that gap also supplies not only the conclusion, but the evidence as well. My question is what role does the evidence play in finding the accredited answer?

Assuming (see the irony? haha) that evidence and premise are the same thing in your second post and that I understand the question...

The role the premise plays is sort of as one side of the bridge, right? Sure, the conclusion is the bigger one but the premise matters as well. Also, premises become HUGE when there is an intermediate conclusion (A --> B --> Conclusion). Sometimes in questions like this, which are normally on the more difficult end of the spectrum, the assumption doesn't even concern the conclusion. The correct answer could very well be getting from A to B, and neither side of the "bridge" is actual conclusion. A simple example of this could be:

"The best team will win the Super Bowl. Because the Seahawks have the best player on the field, Richard Sherman, they are the best team. Therefore, the Seahawks will win the Super Bowl."

Diagrammed: Seahawks have best player --> Seahawks have best team, and the best team will win the Super Bowl --> Seahawks will win Super Bowl.

Here, the conclusion is that the Hawks are winning on Sunday. But when you look for the assumption, you actually won't use the conclusion- for the purposes of this question it is irrelevant. Instead, its between 2 premises (well, one premise and one intermediate conclusion).

Assumption: Having the best player means you have the best team.

In a question like this, a complete understanding of the premises is absolutely ESSENTIAL. If you fixate only on the conclusion, you're missing the answer.

Hope that answers your question, and hope I understood what you were asking correctly!

EDIT: Just reread your original post. So basically, in a question like this, you CANNOT just use the conclusion for scope. In fact, you can only use premises.

Yep ur assumption was right lol, and thanks you understood the question....you suck tho because u sound like a Seahawks fan lol jk..thanks.

Not a hawks fan. Have a LOT of friends that are though. Maybe it's starting to rub off on me not good... thanks for the heads up haha