\
  The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
BackRefresh Options Favorite

Problem with this LSAT Question?

Historian: One traditional childrearing practice in the ni...
..,.,...,..,..,.,.,:,,:,...,:;:,..,:,.,.:..,.
  03/20/17
here we go
america
  03/20/17
The LSAT writers tend to be bad about dealing with degrees o...
twins
  03/20/17
are my objections valid?
..,.,...,..,..,.,.,:,,:,...,:;:,..,:,.,.:..,.
  03/20/17
Yes. Irl. The unstated premise or skill is that you are l...
twins
  03/20/17
but aren't you exaggerating re: fuzziness, probability, beli...
..,.,...,..,..,.,.,:,,:,...,:;:,..,:,.,.:..,.
  03/20/17
I don't think I am. In fact, questions posed as about fuzzin...
twins
  03/20/17
He has a point with this one, I think. (E) ignores the po...
Main Force Patrol
  03/20/17
Looking at the question, the trick is that "tend" ...
twins
  03/20/17
Agreed. You can quickly arrive at this conclusion by realizi...
Main Force Patrol
  03/20/17
Iow the test asks you to convert statements re belief or CAU...
twins
  03/20/17
cr. one got in trouble for existential import
america
  03/20/17
...
twins
  03/20/17
The question and answer are fine... you are reading way into...
brETHer
  03/20/17
This is true, too - a to c have no support, d is backwards, ...
twins
  03/20/17
yes, but it's not a proper inference - as in 100% logically ...
''"'''"'''"'
  03/20/17
No, but the other answers are obviously incorrect, leaving o...
Main Force Patrol
  03/20/17
this was a very easy question, peterman
bollocks
  03/20/17
How quickly did it take you? I definitely had to think about...
...,,..,.,,.,.,:,,:,...,:,:,...,:,.,.:...:.,:.::,.
  03/20/17
That's your problem. You shouldn't be thinking about these. ...
Main Force Patrol
  03/20/17
what'd you get on the real thing?
''"'''"'''"'
  03/20/17
...
''"'''"'''"'
  03/23/17


Poast new message in this thread



Reply Favorite

Date: March 20th, 2017 10:45 AM
Author: ..,.,...,..,..,.,.,:,,:,...,:;:,..,:,.,.:..,.


Historian: One traditional childrearing practice in

the nineteenth century was to make a child who

misbehaved sit alone outside. Anyone passing by

would conclude that the child had misbehaved.

Nowadays, many child psychologists would

disapprove of this practice because they believe that

such practices damage the child’s self-esteem and that

damage to children’s self-esteem makes them less

confident as adults. However, no one disagrees that

adults raised under that traditional practice were, on

average, as confident as adults not so raised.

Which one of the following can be properly inferred from

the historian’s statements?

(A)

The beliefs of many present-day child psychologists

about the consequences of loss of self-esteem are

incorrect.

(B) Some of the most confident adults, as well as some

of the least confident adults, were raised under the

traditional practice in question.

(C)

With the traditional childrearing practice, passersby

did not always make correct inferences about

children’s behavior by observing them outdoors.

(D) The most confident adults are those who developed

the highest level of self-esteem in childhood.

(E)

If children’s loss of self-esteem makes them less

confident as adults, then the traditional childrearing

practice in question did not tend to cause significant

loss of self-esteem.

SPOILER:

The correct answer starts with the first letter of the name of the world's largest land mammal.

But that answer is NOT properly inferrable from the statements above!

Many child psychologists believe that the childrearing practice leads to lower self-esteem in children, which leads to those children having less confidence as adults. But, "no one disagrees that adults raised under the traditional practice, were, on average, as confident as adults not so raised."

The answer the LSAT calls "properly inferred" from the above is that at least one part of the causal chain asserted by the psychologists is incorrect. But this depends on 2 critical assumptions that are entirely unjustified and could easily have been described as flaws. First, just because "no one disagrees" about a statistic DOES NOT MEAN THAT STATISTIC IS TRUE. Second, EVEN IF THAT STATISTIC WERE TRUE -- that adults raised under the practice are on average as confident as adults not raised under the practice -- the correct answer IGNORES CONFOUNDING VARIABLES! Maybe the kind of child who is subject to the childrearing practice starts off with a higher self esteem than the children not so raised, so even though the practice does decrease self esteem, it doesn't make it lower than the other children on average. We'd need to know that the two compared groups -- those raised under the practice and those not so raised -- started off equal in the relevant areas -- self esteem and confidence level when they become adults.

Can someone please explain to me why the correct answer is considered to be 100% logical, to be "properly inferred" from the above?



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3558677&forum_id=2#32872640)



Reply Favorite

Date: March 20th, 2017 10:48 AM
Author: america

here we go

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3558677&forum_id=2#32872653)



Reply Favorite

Date: March 20th, 2017 10:51 AM
Author: twins

The LSAT writers tend to be bad about dealing with degrees of belief, probability, and fuzziness. You are to restrict yourself to the classic syllogism. E is the only answer that fits a classic syllogism.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3558677&forum_id=2#32872671)



Reply Favorite

Date: March 20th, 2017 10:52 AM
Author: ..,.,...,..,..,.,.,:,,:,...,:;:,..,:,.,.:..,.


are my objections valid?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3558677&forum_id=2#32872673)



Reply Favorite

Date: March 20th, 2017 10:56 AM
Author: twins

Yes. Irl.

The unstated premise or skill is that you are looking for a way to convert any q into an Aristotlean syllogism. Hence your objections don't "exist" in the world of the test.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3558677&forum_id=2#32872691)



Reply Favorite

Date: March 20th, 2017 11:03 AM
Author: ..,.,...,..,..,.,.,:,,:,...,:;:,..,:,.,.:..,.


but aren't you exaggerating re: fuzziness, probability, belief? There are definitely LSAT questions that relate to flaws about belief and probability. It's not like everything boils down syllogism. in addition, the lsat uses the confounding variable in causal relationship idea all the time -- so they are aware of it and apply it.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3558677&forum_id=2#32872750)



Reply Favorite

Date: March 20th, 2017 11:04 AM
Author: twins

I don't think I am. In fact, questions posed as about fuzziness or probability are actually tests of whether you can convert such q's to syllogism.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3558677&forum_id=2#32872770)



Reply Favorite

Date: March 20th, 2017 11:56 AM
Author: Main Force Patrol (“Tony, sit down. We need to talk.”)

He has a point with this one, I think.

(E) ignores the possibility of confounding variables, though it would take one hell of a confounding variable to counteract the historical practice if it did, in fact, cause a significant decrease in children's self-esteem. If they would have thrown in an "all else equal" caveat, it would have cleared up this issue, but that it would have made it too easy. Regardless, (E) is the best answer.

Initially, I also thought it had a problem from the perspective that the historical practice may have a significant effect on outlier children, but upon reading it again, the psychologists' opinion appear to apply to all children, so that is not an issue.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3558677&forum_id=2#32873083)



Reply Favorite

Date: March 20th, 2017 12:55 PM
Author: twins

Looking at the question, the trick is that "tend" and "average" cancel out, such that the q reduces to a classic syllogism - the other answer stems don't permit reduction of probabilistic or casual reasoning to a syllogism.

IOW these "hard" problems are built on tricking you into thinking you should use probabilistic reasoning, when in fact you are looking to remove it from the answer.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3558677&forum_id=2#32873607)



Reply Favorite

Date: March 20th, 2017 3:01 PM
Author: Main Force Patrol (“Tony, sit down. We need to talk.”)

Agreed. You can quickly arrive at this conclusion by realizing the answers are fairly obviously incorrect and intuitively realize that the correct answer is at least a possible explanation based on what you described, whether or not you fully grasp it.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3558677&forum_id=2#32874448)



Reply Favorite

Date: March 20th, 2017 10:54 AM
Author: twins

Iow the test asks you to convert statements re belief or CAUSATION into absolute premises, and then use the classic rules of inference.

BTW they never announce that that is what they are doing - this is just meta-knowledge about how the test is constructed.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3558677&forum_id=2#32872681)



Reply Favorite

Date: March 20th, 2017 10:54 AM
Author: america

cr. one got in trouble for existential import

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3558677&forum_id=2#32872682)



Reply Favorite

Date: March 20th, 2017 10:59 AM
Author: twins



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3558677&forum_id=2#32872715)



Reply Favorite

Date: March 20th, 2017 11:48 AM
Author: brETHer

The question and answer are fine... you are reading way into it. The logical conclusion of the paragraph is obvious based on the evidence available.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3558677&forum_id=2#32873032)



Reply Favorite

Date: March 20th, 2017 12:57 PM
Author: twins

This is true, too - a to c have no support, d is backwards, so you can get to e by elimination. But it is fun to probe why the writers wrote e in the way they did.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3558677&forum_id=2#32873624)



Reply Favorite

Date: March 20th, 2017 1:36 PM
Author: ''"'''"'''"'


yes, but it's not a proper inference - as in 100% logically valid based on the evidence.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3558677&forum_id=2#32873862)



Reply Favorite

Date: March 20th, 2017 3:02 PM
Author: Main Force Patrol (“Tony, sit down. We need to talk.”)

No, but the other answers are obviously incorrect, leaving only one answer that is possibly correct. This is how they create "hard" questions.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3558677&forum_id=2#32874455)



Reply Favorite

Date: March 20th, 2017 12:58 PM
Author: bollocks

this was a very easy question, peterman

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3558677&forum_id=2#32873626)



Reply Favorite

Date: March 20th, 2017 1:46 PM
Author: ...,,..,.,,.,.,:,,:,...,:,:,...,:,.,.:...:.,:.::,.


How quickly did it take you? I definitely had to think about it and closely read the possible answers.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3558677&forum_id=2#32873919)



Reply Favorite

Date: March 20th, 2017 3:08 PM
Author: Main Force Patrol (“Tony, sit down. We need to talk.”)

That's your problem. You shouldn't be thinking about these. Reduce the assertions in the first part of the question to their most basic essence and then solve the logic question.

If you are serious about doing well on the LSAT, I strongly recommend practicing these sections with a time limit that is 5 minutes less than what you will be afforded on the actual test. If you have to think about them, you will miss them.

Also, when I started studying, I had a book that contained the observation that sections like this were limited to 6 or 7 types of questions and described the different types. After each practice section, I would go back and categorize each question by its type and tabulate how many questions I missed under each type of question. It turned out almost all of the questions I was missing fell under two types of questions. I worked on identifying what I was missing, and after that, I was getting getting 98% of the questions correct.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3558677&forum_id=2#32874528)



Reply Favorite

Date: March 20th, 2017 4:42 PM
Author: ''"'''"'''"'


what'd you get on the real thing?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3558677&forum_id=2#32875184)



Reply Favorite

Date: March 23rd, 2017 2:14 PM
Author: ''"'''"'''"'




(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3558677&forum_id=2#32898512)