Law School Discussion

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - sg7007

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10
General board for soon-to-be 1Ls / Pre-1L Study Group in Seoul
« on: April 02, 2010, 09:08:49 AM »
Like the title of this thread says, we're planning on making a study group for pre-1Ls in Seoul. There are currently three members in the group. Please let me know if you want to participate in this.

Personal Statement / Please critique my PS
« on: November 01, 2009, 09:22:03 PM »

Studying for the LSAT / PT #23 Sec.3(LR) Q.23 - parallel flawed reasoning
« on: September 02, 2009, 07:21:49 AM »
This is the highway safety/smoking problem.

(B) and (D) were my contenders. The correct answer is (B).

I can kinda see why (D) is wrong. If you have a better lap time for the breaststroke, then you might win more often by practicing it.

But, I don't see how (B) is parallel with the reasoning in the passage. Is the reasoning in (B) even flawed at all?

Please help me with this. Thanks!

Studying for the LSAT / PT 37 Sec.2(LR) Q.26
« on: August 27, 2009, 05:00:52 AM »
This is the lagoon/frogs/owl problem.

The correct answer is (D). Why not (E)?

Here's how I thought. The passage's reasoning states that,
Ashley Collects -> Tanzanite stones -> Found in Tanzania
Therefore, Ashley is unlikely to gather stones not from Tanzania.

I thought (E) had the same reasoning.
Owl Eats -> Frogs -> In lagoon
Therefore, Owls are unlikely to eat something living outside the lagoon.

What is wrong in my reasoning?

Thanks in advance.

Studying for the LSAT / Help me with this sentence.
« on: July 27, 2009, 08:47:25 AM »
This passage is from an anonymous source on the internet, but I know it's not a LSAT passage. I'm posting the other parts of the passage for your understanding.

I can partially understand what the boldic-faced line means, but not exactly. Can someone please explain what exactly "as it were" means? What does "it" refer to?  Thank you.
Here's the passage.
Woodrow Wilson was referring to the liberal idea of the economic market when he said that the free enterprise system is the most efficient economic system. Maximum freedom means maximum productiveness; our “openness” is to be the measure of our stability. Fascination with this ideal has made Americans defy the “Old World” categories of settled possessiveness versus unsettling deprivation, the cupidity of retention versus the cupidity of seizure, a “status quo” defended or attacked. The United States, it was believed, had no status quo ante. Our only “station” was the turning of a stationary wheel, spinning faster and faster. We did not base our system on property but opportunity—which meant we based it not on stability but on mobility. The more things changed, that is, the more rapidly the wheel turned, the steadier we would be. The conventional picture of class politics is composed of the Haves, who want a stability to keep what they have, and the Have-Nots, who want a touch of instability and change in which to scramble for the things they have not. But Americans imagined a condition in which speculators, self-makers, runners are always using the new opportunities given by our land. These economic leaders (front-runners) would thus be mainly agents of change. The nonstarters were considered the ones who wanted stability, a strong referee to give them some position in the race, a regulative hand to calm manic speculation; an authority that can call things to a halt, begin things again from compensatorily staggered “starting lines.”
“Reform” in America has been sterile because it can imagine no change except through the extension of this metaphor of a race, wider inclusion of competitors, “a piece of the action,” as it were, for the disenfranchised. There is no attempt to call off the race. Since our only stability is change, America seems not to honor the quiet work that achieves social interdependence and stability.

Studying for the LSAT / A LR Question
« on: May 18, 2009, 01:00:40 AM »
This is a GMAT LR question, which is nearly identical to a LSAT LR question. They say the correct answer's (B), but I think it's (D). What do you guys think the correct answer is?

Thanks in advance.

Some species of Arctic birds are threatened by recent sharp increases in the population of snow geese, which breed in the Arctic and are displacing birds of less vigorous species. Although snow geese are a popular quarry for hunters in the southern regions where they winter, the hunting season ends if and when hunting has reduced the population by five percent, according to official estimates. Clearly, dropping this restriction would allow the other species to recover.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument?

(A) Hunting limits for snow geese were imposed many years ago in response to a sharp decline in the population of snow geese.
(B) It has been many years since the restriction led to the hunting season for snow geese being closed earlier than the scheduled date.
(C) The number of snow geese taken by hunters each year has grown every year for several years.
(D) As their population has increased, snow geese have recolonized wintering grounds that they had not used for several seasons.
(E) In the snow goose’s winter habitats, the goose faces no significant natural predation.

Studying for the LSAT / *
« on: May 07, 2009, 11:08:30 AM »

Studying for the LSAT / a GMAT LR problem - try it out!
« on: April 17, 2009, 02:57:21 AM »
Hi, everyone. Maybe, some ppl might remember me, maybe not. Now, I'm working as a GMAT instructor in Seoul. (The GMAT's way easier than the LSAT. :) )

I'm stuck with this Weaken question from a reconstructed PT sets (meaning it's from an unofficial material). It's from a GMAT PT, but it's got the same structure as a LSAT LR problem. They say the correct answer is (B), but I think it's (C). I posted this on a GMAT community website, but I think they are not as smart as ppl on this board. :)

Please help me with this question. Thanks in advance!

In two months, the legal minimum wage in the country of Kirlandia will increase from five Kirlandic dollars(KD5.00) Per hour to KD5.50 per hour. Opponents of this increase have argued that the resulting rise in wages will drive the inflation rate up. In fact its impact on wages will probably be negligible, since only a very small proportion of all Kirfandic workers are currently receiving less than KD5.50 per hour.

Q. Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A. Most people in kirlandia who are currently earning the minimum wage have
been employed at their current jobs for less than a year.
B. Some firms in Kirlandia have paid workers considerably less than KD5.00
per hour, in violation of kirlandic employment regulations.
C. Many businesses hire trainees at or near the minimum wage but must
reward trained workers by keeping their paylevels above the pay level
of trainees.
D. The greatest growth in Kirlandia’s economy in recent years has been in
those sectors where workers earn wages that tend to be much higher
than the minimum wage.
E The current minimum wage is insufficient for a worker holding only one job to earn enough to support a family ,even when working full time at that job.

Law School Applications / A short addendum on multiple LSAT scores
« on: January 18, 2009, 04:00:46 AM »

Personal Statement / Where can I find some example PS and DS?
« on: December 13, 2008, 07:13:51 AM »
I've been working on PS and DS now for a few weeks, but I guess I need to get some fresh, new perspectives. Does anybody know where I can get some example statements?

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10