This is such a confusing passage...I could not understand the theories.
Or we don't need to understand the concepts?
I even did some research about mirror but it's still confusing...
Could anyone explain what they are talking about?
What's the structure?
LSAT Forum
2 postsPage 1 of 1
-
- ganbayou
-
Thanks Received: 0
-
Atticus Finch
- Posts: 213
- Joined: June 13th, 2015
-
- ohthatpatrick
-
Thanks Received: 3808
-
Atticus Finch
- Posts: 4661
- Joined: April 01st, 2011
- This post thanked 1 time.
Re: Passage Discussion
Scale
Field-of-sight vs. front to back
Author's VP/Purpose
Present a Debate (and Weigh In)
Important Lines (usually Author's view)
The last paragraph is where we find the author's voice. It's typical when an author is presenting conflicting points of view, in the third person, that we won't hear from the author until the last paragraph, if at all.
The passage begins with a question, which is always worth digesting. Questions are normally very important framing ideas to the passage. Answer 1 takes up the rest of P1.
The signature pivot "however" in line 14 tells us a new point of view is coming. The author's? No, "some physicists". They're giving us Answer 2. We desperately want to know how the author feels about these answers. Which does she prefer? Line 21 is the author busting Answer 2 for relying on a false premise.
But then the 3rd paragraph goes on to elaborate on the appeal of Answer 2. So is this the one the author favors? Well, in line 27, she says "it's successful ... to a point". So the author would give it qualified support.
The last paragraph begins with "In addition to its intuitive appeal, the front-to-back explanation is ...". This tells us several things: we're still talking about Answer 2 and we're still talking about positive things about Answer 2 because this paragraph will be "in addition" to the positive we heard in paragraph 3. And I always love it when they remind me what the previous paragraph was good for. They're basically giving us our Passage Map for P3 -- "the intuitive appeal of F2B".
The final author summary comes in line 48, and since she is saying that removing the observer from consideration is dumb, she has a concern with the fact that front-to-back is motivated by trying to separate the observer.
Paragraph 1
The framing question + Answer 1 (field of sight)
Paragraph 2
Answer 2 (front to back), with some author pushback.
Paragraph 3
The appeal of answer 2, with some author pushback.
Paragraph 4
More appeal of answer 2, with more author pushback.
Takeaway/Pattern: Very tough read. It's hard to understand the two theories, but we primarily need to latch onto some buzz words the passage uses or think of some synonyms we CAN digest and internalize. For field-of-sight, I just picture a human turning around in a circle until what used to be on his left is now on his right. For front-to-back, you just have to picture a 3D world that exists inside the mirror's universe.
#officialexplanation
Field-of-sight vs. front to back
Author's VP/Purpose
Present a Debate (and Weigh In)
Important Lines (usually Author's view)
The last paragraph is where we find the author's voice. It's typical when an author is presenting conflicting points of view, in the third person, that we won't hear from the author until the last paragraph, if at all.
The passage begins with a question, which is always worth digesting. Questions are normally very important framing ideas to the passage. Answer 1 takes up the rest of P1.
The signature pivot "however" in line 14 tells us a new point of view is coming. The author's? No, "some physicists". They're giving us Answer 2. We desperately want to know how the author feels about these answers. Which does she prefer? Line 21 is the author busting Answer 2 for relying on a false premise.
But then the 3rd paragraph goes on to elaborate on the appeal of Answer 2. So is this the one the author favors? Well, in line 27, she says "it's successful ... to a point". So the author would give it qualified support.
The last paragraph begins with "In addition to its intuitive appeal, the front-to-back explanation is ...". This tells us several things: we're still talking about Answer 2 and we're still talking about positive things about Answer 2 because this paragraph will be "in addition" to the positive we heard in paragraph 3. And I always love it when they remind me what the previous paragraph was good for. They're basically giving us our Passage Map for P3 -- "the intuitive appeal of F2B".
The final author summary comes in line 48, and since she is saying that removing the observer from consideration is dumb, she has a concern with the fact that front-to-back is motivated by trying to separate the observer.
Paragraph 1
The framing question + Answer 1 (field of sight)
Paragraph 2
Answer 2 (front to back), with some author pushback.
Paragraph 3
The appeal of answer 2, with some author pushback.
Paragraph 4
More appeal of answer 2, with more author pushback.
Takeaway/Pattern: Very tough read. It's hard to understand the two theories, but we primarily need to latch onto some buzz words the passage uses or think of some synonyms we CAN digest and internalize. For field-of-sight, I just picture a human turning around in a circle until what used to be on his left is now on his right. For front-to-back, you just have to picture a 3D world that exists inside the mirror's universe.
#officialexplanation
2 posts Page 1 of 1