PrepTest - Page 197 - Q 11 and Q12 (Method-AP)

[smackmartine]

Few doubts on Dialogue based ?s (Two people say something).

1)Could there be a common/main conclusion ?
2) What does "argument as a whole means" ? We are dealing with two people, so how can we know what's the argument as a whole means? If we are taking a position, are n't we simply refuting other's ?
3) Big question : Is there a way to tackle this type of problems?

Q11. - a) What's General claim in Answer B means ?
b) If SOME Scientist claim XYZ, should it be assumed as general claim ?
c) What is the purpose of noting down each person's conclusion?
d) What's wrong with C ? Winifred said : "Not necessarily" after all.

Q12 If question asks us to find a function of a statement within Curator's argument, should we completely ignore what Art critic said ? In option B, does "argument's main conclusion" means just the conclusion made my Curator?

Please help.
Thanks in advance.

[Dave Killoran]

Hey Smack,

I'll address the general questions you posted at the top, and then perhaps someone else will jump in and answer the specific ones if I can't get to it immediately

1. Yes, there could be. In those instances, what would likely occur is that the reasoning used to reach that conclusion would be different for the two speakers.

2. "Argument as a whole" would typically refer to one of the speakers in the question.

3. This type of question format is really just a presentation tool--the test makers use this format to be able to present two distinct arguments. They can do this in single speaker questions as well (and do quite frequently). Because the two-speaker presentation is just a format, there's not one type of question associated with this format, and for that reason, there's not a single strategy that you could take. Generally speaking, whoever, your focus should be on understanding the two arguments--where are they similar? where are they different? that's part of the premise/conclusion identification pattern you should take with all reasoning questions, but in this case there is a greater degree of comparative analysis.

That's a start--please let me know if it helps. Thanks!

[smackmartine]

Wao! That's a great explanation indeed.Thanks a lot. I am totally convinced. When we are analyzing similarities and differences between two arguments, it's very likely that we have to spend few more seconds than we generally do on other types. Is n't it? If you can suggest exactly how many minutes I should take on such problems, that will be really helpful. :idea:

Waiting for further explanation on specific ones.

[Dave Killoran]

Well, the amount of time spent on a question will be a function of the overall difficulty of the question and the length of the question. Accordingly, as many two-person stimuli are somewhat lengthy, you can give yourself more time on those. But, remember, that's not always the case--some two-person stimuli are quite short. So, if we're using length as the factor, the time spent on the question is going to vary. The same is true for difficulty, so you can't really create a hard and fast rule about exactly how much time to spend on these questions.

Thanks!

[Steve Stein]

Q12

Few doubts on Dialogue based ?s (Two people say something).


Q12 If question asks us to find a function of a statement within Curator's argument, should we completely ignore what Art critic said ? In option B, does "argument's main conclusion" means just the conclusion made my Curator?

Please help.
Thanks in advance.

Regarding question 12, first of all, you're right--in breaking down the curator's argument, we can set aside the art critic's response. Correct answer choice B provides that the role of the referenced claim is of subsidiary, or secondary conclusion, as follows:

Premise(s) --> subsidiary conclusion --> main conclusion

In this specific example:

Premises:
Red pigment applied after V's death, and red paint wasn't mixed in V's workshop -->

Subsidiary Conclusion: It looks as though someone probably tampered with the painting after V died -->

Main Conclusion: The decision to restore the cloak from red to green is justified.

[Steve Stein]

Q11. - a) What's General claim in Answer B means ?
b) If SOME Scientist claim XYZ, should it be assumed as general claim ?
c) What is the purpose of noting down each person's conclusion?
d) What's wrong with C ? Winifred said : "Not necessarily" after all.



Please help.
Thanks in advance.

W's general claim is "not necessarily." That is, there doesn't necessarily have to be another reason for the bees' dance. As provided by correct answer choice B, the claim about some bees' various navigation is offered to support W's general claim.

As for choice C, that's a fairly common incorrect answer choice on the LSAT. But W doesn't have an issue with the accuracy of H's evidence (W doesnt, for example, claim that Forager bees don't leave a scent trail). Rather, W's issue is with H's conclusion that there has to be another explanation for the bees' dance.

[smackmartine]

My concepts are clearer on the dialogue based questions now than ever before. This discussion was really worthy. I can correlate both the answers now.
You guys are awesome. Thanks again for the detailed explanation!

-Smack.