Passage - General Questions

[Administrator]

Passage Discussion

VIEWSTAMP Analysis:

This explanation is still in progress. Please post any questions below!

[lathlee]

Hi. I am on a mission to try as many difficult LSAT questions as much as I can. since this is one of the Hardest RC of all time (honorable mentions of most difficult passage), I want to see how similar and capable my view stamp can be compared to the experts' so can you guys do viewstamp for this passage? plz? thx.

[Claire Horan]

Hi lathlee,

This response is repeated from another post, but just in case you didn't see it:

The best way to evaluate your ViewSTAMP is to evaluate whether it resulted in correct answers. If it didn't lead to correct answer, it may not have been a good ViewSTAMP. You can post it here and a staffmember can help you see where you went wrong. If it did lead to correct answers, it was sufficient for your purposes. Every "expert" will come up with a different ViewSTAMP, and that's okay if they each allow their makers to find the correct answers.

ViewSTAMP is merely a fancy note-taking strategy. If you find your "notes" were not complete enough, simply go back to the passage and see what you missed.

If you end up having trouble with the questions for this passage, please do post your ViewSTAMP so we can help with any further questions you may have!

[sdb606]

I'd like to take a crack at it. Here's how I go through a passage. I underline anything that indicates an element of VIEWSTAMP but I don't lay out the VIEWSTAMP ideas in order.

P1. Viewpoint: some thinkers. They say math is artificial and when used to explain something in science, necessarily requires constructing an artificial way of explaining some aspect of the world. Much like we construct words to describe aspects of the natural world. The word "water" is an artificial construct but it describes something real. The last sentence of P1 is the MP (full disclosure, I got the MP question wrong.). So far no signs of tone. Argument: the word "accordingly" suggests a consequence or implication. Structure: introduces a concept to be expounded upon and the MP.

P2. Discusses the role of language in the acquisition of knowledge. Describes a debate: does language universally describe concrete objects and behaviors or is it decided by convention? Meaning does the word "water" describe H2O or is it generally agreed upon that H2O should be described by a word. Conventions create inexactness because they are not tied to anything concrete like physical objects (Not sure about this explanation.) No tone. Argument: "thus" in beginning of P2 suggests a consequence of the MP in P1. Structure is explaining implication of the MP in P1.

P3. The convention side of the debate in P2 has been gaining support. View: Linguists who support this say language changes based on convention changing. They say mathematical statements are believed to be an accurate description of the world but when someone comes up with another way of describing the world, that original mathematical statement becomes incorrect. Therefore, the language describing a particular aspect of the world changes, in line with the linguists support for the conventions side of the debate in P2. P3 cites another View, "some would argue" that supports the critics. Tone: suggests the author agrees with the linguists on the conventions side of the debate in P2. Argument: the linguists argument in third sentence. Structure: support for conventions side of debate in P2.

P4. Implications of the second side of the P2 debate (that words are not exact descriptions of the world). This P is all the author's opinion. Author shows some major problems that result from accepting the linguists' theory but does not resolve it. Tone: supports linguists argument but believes it creates unanswered questions. Structure: implications of the linguists theory.