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.


Messages - ChiGirl

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 12
41
Studying for the LSAT / Re: SUPERPREP test B-HELP!!
« on: September 17, 2008, 07:26:59 PM »
My chances of improving on LR are much better than you EVER improving your social ineptness.

Why so angry with life? It can't be that bad. :-[ 

My offer still stands regarding that therapist you so desperately need my dear. Let me know. Send me a PM! :)



LOL! AGAIN, you intrude on someone else's thread with another stupid comment?!

Seriously, GROW the @#!* up! :o

You don't like the LSAC's explanation in the book?

Haha! I love how dumb you are. Seriously.

I was asking if the OP likes the LSAC explanation. I like Superprep's explanations, and I was curious as to the OP's opinion. Thus: "You don't like the LSAC's explanation in the book?"

Get back to missing most of your LR questions. I'm not surprised the logical reasoning section is hard for you.

Stop confirming stereotypes with your posts. Get it? It might take you a while to put it together..maybe you can post a thread & ask for an explanation.

42
Studying for the LSAT / Re: Possibly 1 of the worst games ever?
« on: September 17, 2008, 06:21:22 PM »
Good to know. This was a nasty one! :-\


Do I need to worry about games like this or the following miserable one on the exam?

I'm just wondering if I should even bother wasting my time w/these.

A science student has exactly 4 flasks- 1,2,3, and 4- originally containing a red, blue, a green, and an orange chemical...

Republican/Democrat game, yes.  Mixing chemical game, no, probably not.

43
Studying for the LSAT / Re: SUPERPREP test B-HELP!!
« on: September 17, 2008, 06:20:30 PM »
LOL! AGAIN, you intrude on someone else's thread with another stupid comment?! ::)

Seriously, GROW the @#!* up! :o

You don't like the LSAC's explanation in the book?

44
Studying for the LSAT / Re: Possibly 1 of the worst games ever?
« on: September 16, 2008, 08:25:07 AM »
Thank you so much everyone.  I just re-did the game and got 2 wrong. But after reviewing, I noticed the 2 wrong came from stupid, careless mistakes!!!

45
Studying for the LSAT / Re: Possibly 1 of the worst games ever?
« on: September 15, 2008, 07:01:08 PM »
Do I need to worry about games like this or the following miserable one on the exam?

I'm just wondering if I should even bother wasting my time w/these.

A science student has exactly 4 flasks- 1,2,3, and 4- originally containing a red, blue, a green, and an orange chemical. An experiement consists of mixing exactly 2 of these chemicals together by completely emptying the contents of 1 of the flasks into another of the flasks. The following conditions apply:

The product of an experiment cannot be used in further experiements.
Mixing the contents of 1 and 2 produces a red chemical.
Mixing the contents of 2 and 3 produces an orange chemical.
Mixing the contents of 3 w/the contents of either 1 or 4 produces a blue chemical.
Mixing the contens of 4 w/the contents of either 1 or 3 produces a green chemical.

46
I agree with you that there's something apparently wrong if you're getting 10+ wrong on an LR section.

But I'm not sure what I could write that would take up a paragraph.  Especially if it's a short formal logic stimulus.

Poo?

Writing a paragraph for each? Now that's something I have NEVER heard before.  I don't think there are enough hours in the day to do that.

After I do a section, I review it as we all should.  The weird thing about this? About 98%, I actually understand why the right answer is right and why the wrong answers are wrong.

I call bull, but in case you're telling the truth, this should be quick and easy.  Write down five sentences for each question.  Four sentences that say exactly why the wrong answers are wrong, and one that says why the right one is right.  Don't just think it; write it down.

i also call bull. to be honest, i'm not sure a sentence is gonna be enough though. i could definitely see someone writing 'this is not the flaw described' or some poo like that. i think it may be safer to err on the side of caution and (try) to write a whole paragraph explaining the nature of why each answer choice is incorrect and why the correct answer choice is correct. after a while you may not need to do that anymore, since presumably at that point you should be able to weed out the extraneous poo and be able to jot down a few words indicating the reason for your explanation. initially however, especially if you're getting 10 or more wrong, you need to get as explicit as possible, i think, to reap the most benefit.

poo is the filter when you say a certain curse word that starts with 'sh' and ends with 'it'. definitely takes the edge off of my writing though.. :(

I think with a paragraph you're going to hit a point of diminishing returns.  I like a sentence (though more than just, "no, that's not the flaw,") because eventually you're going to want to quickly justify crossing off answers in your head.

Something like, "This describes a necessary/sufficient flaw, but I'm looking for a causal flaw," or "We're not concerned with other Indo-European languages," should be fine.

i agree that there is a point of diminishing returns, but when people are getting 10+ wrong, then it indicates to me that they likely lack an explicit understanding of how logical reasoning works.. more then likely they're going with their 'gut' or whatever. so what happens when someone who goes with their 'gut' writes a one sentence explanation for each incorrect answer? (from my experience) not very good explanations at all. so i say the paragraph is a decent limit to set to err on the side of caution.

47
Thank you Lindbergh!!! :-* :-* :-*

48
Major issues!
OUCH! :P

Still stalking me freak?


yawn

49
I'm with you on the assumption questions for sure.

As for the parallel, I skip those and come back to them at the end.

just wanted to say i totally feel your pain.  my RC track record is pretty stubborn too, but LR kills my brain like no other. especially parallel reasoning and assumption questions.  :-[

50
Poo?

Writing a paragraph for each? Now that's something I have NEVER heard before.  I don't think there are enough hours in the day to do that.

After I do a section, I review it as we all should.  The weird thing about this? About 98%, I actually understand why the right answer is right and why the wrong answers are wrong.

I call bull, but in case you're telling the truth, this should be quick and easy.  Write down five sentences for each question.  Four sentences that say exactly why the wrong answers are wrong, and one that says why the right one is right.  Don't just think it; write it down.

i also call bull. to be honest, i'm not sure a sentence is gonna be enough though. i could definitely see someone writing 'this is not the flaw described' or some poo like that. i think it may be safer to err on the side of caution and (try) to write a whole paragraph explaining the nature of why each answer choice is incorrect and why the correct answer choice is correct. after a while you may not need to do that anymore, since presumably at that point you should be able to weed out the extraneous poo and be able to jot down a few words indicating the reason for your explanation. initially however, especially if you're getting 10 or more wrong, you need to get as explicit as possible, i think, to reap the most benefit.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 12