Law School Discussion

Nine Years of 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 - Cambridge LSAT

Pages: 1 2 [3]
21
Studying for the LSAT / Re: October 1996 preptest, S1, LG, #2 & #3
« on: December 10, 2009, 12:54:11 PM »
You can complete the second game using just the rules and the contrapositives. If you wanted to diagram it, you could do something similar to this:


For the third game, setting up 3 templates helps to eliminate some of the uncertainty.

1) If the hostile witnesses are scheduled for Monday and Tuesday, U must be scheduled for Wednesday morning and QR must be scheduled for Wednesday afternoon.


2) If the hostile witnesses are scheduled for Tuesday and Wednesday, U must be scheduled for Monday morning and QR must be scheduled for Monday afternoon.


3) If the hostile witnesses are scheduled for Friday and Saturday, Z must be scheduled for Thursday afternoon.

22
This game is very limited, in that there are only four possible unique pairings of dancers to dances.  See them here: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=87283

23
Studying for the LSAT / Re: Prep Material FREE
« on: November 13, 2009, 08:28:55 PM »

24
Studying for the LSAT / Re: Hard Strengthen Principle ?
« on: November 01, 2009, 01:42:45 AM »
There's an additional distinction that should help you see what separates B and E.  The sociologist's first statement gives a reason to avoid generating efficiency ideas from higher up the corporate ladder.  The subconclusion and conclusion state:
employer emphasizes employees' positive contributions to ideas -> ideas implemented more quickly and effectively
It's a basic if/then statement, broken into two sentences.  E supports the initial premise by providing additional evidence why the rejected approach should not be used.  However, we don't need additional support for the premise.  We need to strengthen/support the conclusion.  B, on the other hand, provides a reason to believe that the if/then conclusion is valid.  Conditionally, B looks like this:
employees believe they participated in generating ideas -> employees more likely to carry out those ideas
We now have an additional reason why the approach advocated by the sociologist would be effective in implementing changes.  In short, E supports a premise, while B supports the conclusion.

25
Studying for the LSAT / Re: Can you figure this out?
« on: October 30, 2009, 10:26:47 PM »
Here's a link to solutions for all the games from this PrepTest:
http://www.cambridgelsat.com/swffile?key=kdVpgQVLpFsgDHw7YEheJg%3d%3d

26
Studying for the LSAT / Re: June 2004, Logic Game #4 Help!
« on: October 26, 2009, 10:42:26 PM »
Since we're given the exact number of trucks that serve building Y, consider using the buildings as your base:

27
Studying for the LSAT / Re: Preptest 19, Logic Games, the last one!
« on: October 26, 2009, 10:27:24 PM »
If you're more of a visual person, you could diagram the opening conditions like so:

28
Studying for the LSAT / Re: Flaw problem
« on: October 26, 2009, 02:34:38 AM »
The proposed solution deals with the issue of knowing which of the available wills is the most recent.  However, does it change the fact that the executor won't know if the will with the most recent date among the discovered wills is in fact the most recent will? No.  As mentioned in the stimulus, the will with the most recent date might not have been discovered.

29
Studying for the LSAT / Re: PT46, S2(LR), Q7
« on: October 26, 2009, 02:13:05 AM »
The argument never cites a binary for behaviors (i.e. instinctual/flexible), so why is it necessary that insect brain size < required size for flexible behavior ----> insect behavior = pure instinct?

I felt the more qualified statement in (E) was appropriate.  Please advise.

Instinctual and noninstinctual are logical opposites and represent the only possibilities for behavior in this question.  A behavior either is instinctual or it is not.  The argument states:
capable of flexible behavior -> large number of neurons

The contrapositive is:
insufficient number of neurons -> not capable of flexible behavior

Since we're told that no insect has a brain size large enough to hold a sufficient number of neurons, we can infer that insects are not capable of flexible behavior, and must, therefore, engage exclusively in instinctual behavior.

In choice E, you're mistaking a necessary condition for a sufficient one.  Without the word only, E would be correct.  Can we infer that if a species engages solely in instinctual behavior, its brain is as small as or smaller than an insect's?  No.  We don't know the threshold past which brain size and neuron numbers are sufficient for noninstinctual behavior.  We only know that insect brain sizes and neuron numbers are insufficient for flexible behavior.  Further, would having a large enough brain size and a sufficient number of neurons guarantee that a species engaged in noninstinctual behavior? No. These two are necessary, not sufficient.

Pages: 1 2 [3]