Geek thread - Manhattan LSAT Q & A Forum

[Fianna13]

Thanks Matt! that was really helpful.

[Big Dog]

just another satisfied customer of Manhattan's (major) revised LG guide.

From -6 in October to -0 in December. Simply awesome book.

(Only if my investment returns were so good as the investment in Manhattan's paperback!)

[dusters]

Have the 3rd session of the online class tonight. Really enjoying it so far.

[Manhattan LSAT Noah]

Thanks for the shout-outs, and congrats to everyone that's done with the LSAT.

For those that want to review PT68 with us, we're hosting a free online workshop on Tuesday night. Here's the sign-up link. Onward!

[jmart154]

Hey Matt/Noah.

Rather straightforward question. Once you have identified the argument core, it is only the premise(s) and conclusion that need to be considered when considering the answer choices, correct? For example, so-called extraneous information such as background information and opposing points are to be left out when evaluating the answers, if I am not mistaken.

I would appreciate your insight on the matter!

[Manhattan LSAT Noah]

Hey Matt/Noah.

Rather straightforward question. Once you have identified the argument core, it is only the premise(s) and conclusion that need to be considered when considering the answer choices, correct? For example, so-called extraneous information such as background information and opposing points are to be left out when evaluating the answers, if I am not mistaken.

I would appreciate your insight on the matter!

That's a straightforward question that gets to the heart of the matter.

Yes, for assumption family questions, the answer must deal with the connection between the premise and conclusion.

To go a bit further with this issue, focusing on the gap is one the major struggles for most folks. What I recommend is a rather formal approach for a while: say "I agree that XXX STATE PREMISE XXX, but I'm really not convinced that we have to then conclude that XXX STATE CONCLUSION XXX. One issue is XXX STATE POTENTIAL DEBATE POINT XXX."

Once folks are strong at identifying the gap, they can get into the subtler stuff, namely that some answers may deal only with the conclusion or premise. And, that for something to help the argument (for assumption and strengthen questions), we're not trying to make the conclusion true on its own, but make it so that we have to (or are more likely to) conclude it based on the given premise.

I hope that's helpful.

[Manhattan LSAT Noah]

We're bored. You're confused. Let's hang out.

[BlaqBella]

Noah, Matt, can "most" include "all" ?

I was under the impression they are exclusive.

[Manhattan LSAT Noah]

Noah, Matt, can "most" include "all" ?

I was under the impression they are exclusive.

Annoying issue (and good question).

If I were to say that most of the people looking at this thread are on a device that uses electricity, is that logically correct? Yes.

Matt has a better memory for this sort of thing--he has all past and future LSATs implanted in his brain when he was a young lad--but I vaguely recall a question that, when you dug into the correct answer, it hinged on most being not all, but I think, as is almost always the case with those sorts of moments, the wrong answers were clearly wrong. Matt, can you access that implant on that one?

Anyway, think of most as more than 50% and you're all good (and, thus, mostly good).

[BlaqBella]

Noah, Matt, can "most" include "all" ?

I was under the impression they are exclusive.

Annoying issue (and good question).

If I were to say that most of the people looking at this thread are on a device that uses electricity, is that logically correct? Yes.

Matt has a better memory for this sort of thing--he has all past and future LSATs implanted in his brain when he was a young lad--but I vaguely recall a question that, when you dug into the correct answer, it hinged on most being not all, but I think, as is almost always the case with those sorts of moments, the wrong answers were clearly wrong. Matt, can you access that implant on that one?

Anyway, think of most as more than 50% and you're all good (and, thus, mostly good).

Thanks Noah. I hope to hear Matt's input soon.

[matt@manhattanlsat]

Noah, Matt, can "most" include "all" ?

I was under the impression they are exclusive.

Hey Blaqbella, good question. The short answer is they are not exclusive. "Some" and "most" include the possibility of "all." Think of "some" and "most" statements as setting up floors, but not ceilings on the quantity. "Some" statements can be interpreted as at least one. For the most part "some" and "many" are equivalent, though not always - there is one question in the history of the LSAT that does test the difference between "some" (at least one) and "many" (more than one). Check out this question if you're interested: PT1, S3, Q21 - A society in which there.

I could not find an Inference question where we knew "most A's are B's," and had an incorrect answer that read "some A's are not B's" - though it would be incorrect. I did find many examples where we knew "some A's are B's" and there were incorrect answers that read "some A's are not B's." Check out the following two examples:
PT23, S2, Q10 - All bridges build from
PT33, S3, Q8 - Most people invest in

Hope that answers your question, and if you have any further related questions, we're happy to help!

[Manhattan LSAT Noah]

I could not find an Inference question where we knew "most A's are B's," and had an incorrect answer that read "some A's are not B's" - though it would be incorrect. I did find many examples where we knew "some A's are B's" and there were incorrect answers that read "some A's are not B's." Check out the following two examples:
PT23, S2, Q10 - All bridges build from
PT33, S3, Q8 - Most people invest in

See, there's the implant doing its thing.

[BlaqBella]

Noah, Matt, can "most" include "all" ?

I was under the impression they are exclusive.

Hey Blaqbella, good question. The short answer is they are not exclusive. "Some" and "most" include the possibility of "all." Think of "some" and "most" statements as setting up floors, but not ceilings on the quantity. "Some" statements can be interpreted as at least one. For the most part "some" and "many" are equivalent, though not always - there is one question in the history of the LSAT that does test the difference between "some" (at least one) and "many" (more than one). Check out this question if you're interested: PT1, S3, Q21 - A society in which there.

I could not find an Inference question where we knew "most A's are B's," and had an incorrect answer that read "some A's are not B's" - though it would be incorrect. I did find many examples where we knew "some A's are B's" and there were incorrect answers that read "some A's are not B's." Check out the following two examples:
PT23, S2, Q10 - All bridges build from
PT33, S3, Q8 - Most people invest in

Hope that answers your question, and if you have any further related questions, we're happy to help!

So if I read this correctly:

Some - at least one to ALL

Many - at least 2 to ALL

Most - at least more than half to ALL

Majority - at least more than half to ALL


Is this correct??

[lawschoolplease1]

Hi Matt/Noah,

Question here!
OCT 02
first LR
#9
I understand why answer E is the best answer choice, but I don't like it!
by saying that dinosaurs were "susceptible" to, we don't know if the dinosaurs will definitively get the fatal respiratory problems. and it's only if the dinosaurs get te fatal respiratory problems that we can say this answer choice works.
that's like saying i'm susceptible to the cold because it's winter, but i dont know i'll actually get a cold this winter.
How can i come to terms with this answer choice?

[matt@manhattanlsat]

So if I read this correctly:

Some - at least one to ALL

Many - at least 2 to ALL

Most - at least more than half to ALL

Majority - at least more than half to ALL


Is this correct??

That's correct. And if you'd like some other keywords that indicate quantified statements, here are some more:

[BlaqBella]

So if I read this correctly:

Some - at least one to ALL

Many - at least 2 to ALL

Most - at least more than half to ALL

Majority - at least more than half to ALL


Is this correct??

That's correct. And if you'd like some other keywords that indicate quantified statements, here are some more:

You and your team are amazing. Thank you for teaching the LSAT!

[matt@manhattanlsat]

Hi Matt/Noah,

Question here!
OCT 02
first LR
#9
I understand why answer E is the best answer choice, but I don't like it!
by saying that dinosaurs were "susceptible" to, we don't know if the dinosaurs will definitively get the fatal respiratory problems. and it's only if the dinosaurs get te fatal respiratory problems that we can say this answer choice works.
that's like saying i'm susceptible to the cold because it's winter, but i dont know i'll actually get a cold this winter.
How can i come to terms with this answer choice?

Hi lawschoolplease1, I see your frustration with this one. The answer is in the task set forth by the question stem. Does it actually ask you to resolve the apparent discrepancy? No. It asks for an answer choice that would "most help resolve" the discrepancy. That means that the correct answer doesn't need to actually show that the dinosaurs died of respiratory problems associated with the asteroid debris, but needs to offer some guidance to how scientists could believe that dinosaurs were made extinct by the asteroid, even though they know that the debris could not have contributed to the extinction by blocking out the sun and killing off the dinosaurs by freezing them or by killing all of the plant life. So the short answer is, does answer choice help to explain the scientists belief? Yes.

[lawschoolplease1]

Hi Matt/Noah,

Question here!
OCT 02
first LR
#9
I understand why answer E is the best answer choice, but I don't like it!
by saying that dinosaurs were "susceptible" to, we don't know if the dinosaurs will definitively get the fatal respiratory problems. and it's only if the dinosaurs get te fatal respiratory problems that we can say this answer choice works.
that's like saying i'm susceptible to the cold because it's winter, but i dont know i'll actually get a cold this winter.
How can i come to terms with this answer choice?

Hi lawschoolplease1, I see your frustration with this one. The answer is in the task set forth by the question stem. Does it actually ask you to resolve the apparent discrepancy? No. It asks for an answer choice that would "most help resolve" the discrepancy. That means that the correct answer doesn't need to actually show that the dinosaurs died of respiratory problems associated with the asteroid debris, but needs to offer some guidance to how scientists could believe that dinosaurs were made extinct by the asteroid, even though they know that the debris could not have contributed to the extinction by blocking out the sun and killing off the dinosaurs by freezing them or by killing all of the plant life. So the short answer is, does answer choice help to explain the scientists belief? Yes.

thank you!
I hate questions like this where there's a tiny bit of gap, and I feel guilty of being too presumptuous!!

[mystikal]

Please help me understand Inference questions...
And how to decipher it from a Must be true question please

[matt@manhattanlsat]

Please help me understand Inference questions...
And how to decipher it from a Must be true question please

Think of Must be True questions as belonging to a small family of question types we use the umbrella term of Inference questions to describe.

Inference questions include the following: Must be True, Most Strongly Supported, and Must be False.

Must be True questions have the highest degree of provability: absolute. Meaning if you think of a hypothetical that conforms to the given information that contradicts the answer choice under question, that answer choice is incorrect.

Most Strongly Supported questions usually give students a headache because students don't consider the difference between them and Must be True. Hypotheticals that run counter to the answer choice under consideration, don't necessarily discount the answer choice. It may be the case that the answer choice does not have to be true, but is nonetheless supported by the information.

Must be False questions are rarer, and lately have been driven predominately by conditional logic. For these consider contradicting one of the stated claims, or an inference of those claims.

So that's the difference in a nutshell, but there's so much more to learn here. Consider the patterns that reemerge within the stimulus and the characteristics of correct & incorrect answers within each of these forms of Inference questions. You'll find over time that the patterns that you see in the stimulus are very different than those within other question types. For example, on Inference questions you're much more likely to see chains of conditional reasoning, whereas on Strengthen/Weaken questions you're much more likely to see issues of causation.

[the_pakalypse]

Just went through your LG book and found it immensely helpful. I may have forgotten this from the book, but when going through Could Be True questions, the rule-less entities are often the correct answer choice. For questions in which this kind of floater is present, would the optimal method be to eliminate the choices as usually recommended, or target the floating entity and prove it to be true? I think I vaguely remember the latter being used in some of your solutions to the LGs but I'm not sure.

Also, how do you feel about eliminating the rest of the answers as a method of double-checking your work? I'm in a stage where I'm still getting around -1 at LGs, while finishing just in the nick of time....so I'm not sure if I should prioritize accuracy or speed.

Thanks!

[matt@manhattanlsat]

Just went through your LG book and found it immensely helpful. I may have forgotten this from the book, but when going through Could Be True questions, the rule-less entities are often the correct answer choice. For questions in which this kind of floater is present, would the optimal method be to eliminate the choices as usually recommended, or target the floating entity and prove it to be true? I think I vaguely remember the latter being used in some of your solutions to the LGs but I'm not sure.

You've got it. In general, if it's a conditional question, follow the inferences from that information first. Then look around for elements and positions that have not been placed (typically this will involve the floaters) and check them in the answer choices first. If it's an unconditional question, go straight to your floaters.

Also, how do you feel about eliminating the rest of the answers as a method of double-checking your work? I'm in a stage where I'm still getting around -1 at LGs, while finishing just in the nick of time....so I'm not sure if I should prioritize accuracy or speed.

This is something I personally must do in order to be successful in the LG section. I commit too many "human errors" and in order to catch them I need to double check my work by eliminating wrong answers on questions where it is easy to do so. Remain flexible, some questions have wrong answers that take almost no time to eliminate, others have wrong answers that would burn through a lot of clock. Build your confidence and double check your work when it's easy to do so or when you don't feel comfortable with the game. But proceed with confidence when you're certain that you're operating the game correctly.

[evolution]

Hey, I'm sure this question or a variation of this question is buried somewhere in this thread, but in terms of content, is there a reasonable difference between the 2nd and 3rd editions of the RC Guide? They are almost the exact same price, so which edition would you suggest?

[Manhattan LSAT Noah]

Hey, I'm sure this question or a variation of this question is buried somewhere in this thread, but in terms of content, is there a reasonable difference between the 2nd and 3rd editions of the RC Guide? They are almost the exact same price, so which edition would you suggest?

We only cleaned up the typesetting and made a few corrections. Either is fine, but if it's all the same to you, get the third as it's a bit easier on the eye.

[Theopliske8711]

Can you guys help with the if, but only if, rules that appear in a number of games and LR questions? How to interpret that?