#5 - As a result of modern medicine, more people have been

[lathlee]

Hi. I got the question's answer correct. but this bothered me a lot: the question, "Which one of the following propositions is most precisely exemplified by the situation presented above? What kind of question is this?

I got it correct cuz by question's wording, I knew it belonged to 1st Family, Must be true Family subtypes.

[jk615]

I believe it is a Must Be True Principle question

[Jon Denning]

This is an interesting one, in that with things like Must Be True Principle and Justify the Conclusion Principle (and even Strengthen Principle to some degree) the task is often so exceptionally similar as to be synonymous: match, as near to perfect as possible, the broad strokes of the principle with the specific details of the scenario presented.

So whether you're moving up (Justify/Strengthen) or down (Must), you're ultimately just playing that matching game, looking for a piece-to-piece concordance.

That isn't to suggest you can completely ignore the construction/type itself (as I'll explain shortly), but merely to note that the distinction typically proves irrelevant in practice...something I think we can all be thankful for

As for the difference, it's the same precept we see with regular Must vs Strengthen: we classify questions as Must Be True when the stimulus, whether specific scenario or broad principle, is used to determine the correct answer; Justify and Strengthen move in the opposite direction, where the correct answer choice (again, whether specific or broad) is used to affect your opinion of the argument in the stimulus. The degree of help is where we draw the line between Strengthen (help) and Justify (proof).

So which way are we moving here?

I'd argue that it's downward, where the facts in the stimulus are used to find an answer choice principle that best describes, broadly, what they tell us. So for my money this is classic Must Be True! In fact, it operates an awful lot like a Method of Reasoning question (which themselves are just abstract Must Be True), where the correct answer simply describes, in generalized terms, the details in the stimulus

A final takeaway: stay vigilant in your desire to correctly identify and describe each question that you see by type, as so much of your success depends on knowing what the task at hand truly is, and what tools then are most powerfully deployed in completing it. But. Recognize too that every so often the type of question matters little (if at all) relative to the nature of the relationship that must exist between stimulus and answer choice. Principle questions are prime candidates in that latter regard, since, as I noted above, it's always just a game of matching pieces.

Hope this helps!

[lathlee]

Hi. Jon, thank you.\

your answer clarified quite a bit; was a good help. At the end, I concluded as broad range 1st family as you explained for me. I thought this question type was 1st family question that is crossover version of Method of reasoning and Must be True with some element of Main Point

[lathlee]

Hi. Just making sure. it is a question type somewhere between Method of reasoning and must be true right? more leaning towards to method of reasoning ?

[JaredBeats]

Lathlee - a piece of advice from someone who's been studying for this test for like 8 months now - stop worrying about the question type. Just READ and UNDERSTAND the question I know, I know... it sounds obvious, but I feel like most prep companies will try to impose an artificial nomenclature that may or may not reflect the actual way this question was originally classified. Some will call this Match the Principle question. Others will call it Must Be True. Personally, I find the Must Be True label inappropriate here. The answer is neither an inference nor an entailment. The Justify label is even less applicable. You aren't looking for a sufficient assumption to prove a conclusion. Powerscore doesn't have the right category for these types of questions, but that shouldn't stop you from getting them right.

- Jared

[Dave Killoran]

Hi Jared,

We'll have to disagree on that last point In this one, there's no conclusion in the stimulus, so anything argument-based—such as Justify, Method, etc—is a dead issue. That means that as far as Principles go, you have to be looking at something more fact-based in the First Family. To me this is a clear case of using the information in the stimulus to prove which answer follows (or doesn't follow), so it's Must Be True. Note the point Jon makes about Must Be True and Method being in that same Family, btw.

That aside, here's where people run into issues: when the try to let categories control what's they do as opposed to letting the categories just help them when easily applicable. Knowing how information works in question stems is amazingly useful, but if a student runs into something unclear, our advice has always been: try to get the basic idea and then move along quickly. DON'T stop and agonize over a question stem type for a minute, because you don't have that kind of time. Same thing when using other ideas, like conditional reasoning, etc. Some people get very fixated on those (lathlee knows what I'm referring to here) and focus more on the idea than how it's being used in the question. That's always a mistake.

The tools themselves aren't the issue, but for some students (especially those where English is a second language), it's very convenient to want use them almost in a rule-based fashion. That's dangerous on a test like the LSAT because the English language just has too many variations and exceptions to ever allow for such a an approach to be fully successful. The point I always preach is: be flexible, and understand that clarity of the stimulus is critical to any success on LR. Do I want students to know questions types? Yes, because that knowledge—when it becomes second-nature—helps everyone go faster.

Thanks!

[lathlee]

Jared two points: First about your ealier point of how Powerscore cannot really help to answer the question I posted:

Well. there are two possibilities why you and I couldn't explain utilizing Powerscore, right? it might be due tof Powerscore Lessons' in-capability or We just couldn't find the right reference from Powerscore to handle the situation.

Mr. Dave just proved that it was the latter case.

Point number 2, I have to disagree with you on Powescore's quality of service is not adequate enough. Btw, this is a way of a sucking up perspective too. So it is biased and if you don't want to agree with me, that's fine as well; I say this cuz this is honestly how I see the situation. I wanted to do this earlier; I am doing this now cuz my computer with a keyboard just fixed so I can finally type.

Mr. Killoan (aka: Dave) and his team don't have to explain the asked questions on the Powerscore web; I know the counter arguments; by answering, they get more businesses and create more revenues as well including creating more personable and friendly images as well.

But I suggest you look at the answer timings and questions other boards other in this website than LSAT questions section including consultations about purchasing materials.

All of the power score staff especially Dave, I saw so many times; they go out of their ways to counsel and explain the stuff related to law schools questions that they don't have to answer which would not matter much of creating good friendly images in first place. Dave, I saw so many times; he many times informs the students to not to purchase certain materials to his students even though that is clearly bad for his business.

I saw many of Powerscores staff answer late in the night including Sundays; I saw the answering staff has increased its numbers to accommodate the needs of students more quickly and better (This might be due to Powerscore has been doing its business well and its student populations increased) but Powerscore corporation doesn't have to increase their staff in order to answer some numbers of questions in quicker manner; students just have to wait for little longer. It is against their profit.

Granted, some questions in the web answered later than what many students would want, probably immediately or within 24 hours, but every question is always answered in the end.
Including the occasions, the Powerscore staff tries to answer even though some students bringing in Non-Powerscore philosophies and demanding an answer, Powerscore staff still tries their best to answer.

So I ask: isn't this basically all the students/customers/clients can ask for a knowledge-consulting business? If anything, don't you think Powerscore is trying to do probably more than a bucks' worth?