Hey, we all had to get an undergrad degree.
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 - WannabeLAW
Someone tell me when the scores are in. I just want a 160 (LSAT fairy, grant me that wish!). Until then I have to get ready for the Fundamentals in Engineering Exam in April (it's 8 hours long). Oh, I've also got an engineering design project. I'll see y'all around. Bye.
I just remembered another LR question. I don't remember the specifics (kind of like I didn't remember the specifics of the rodent question, which ended up leading to debate), but it had something to do with Poetry and Novels, and how people in the 17th century have their own private writing rooms but aren't rich enough to afford the education necessary to learn techniques for poetry or something. I'm 100% sure this is a question.
If it's not experimental then it's a valid question. I had an exp. LR and I can't pinpoint the real-deal. Anyway, it asked which one would support the reason that women wrote poetry and not novels was not influenced by money(?)
The answer I chose was that women were refused entry to schools that taught how to write novels.(I think the stimulus said writing novels required formal education).
Other answers included : More men wrote poetry than women.
The rodent answer I chose said that: the figures that the Eurpoean government cited cannot be the result of the elimination alone.
That's what I had since the government claim could have resulted from the exceptional cold winter that was observed. (passage said rodents fare poorly in cold weather).
I don't remember the letter but I'm almost positive the answer had to do with seedlings not growing where there were mature tree. It was somewhere in the middle of the pack of answer choices; I'm pretty sure it wasn't E. Maybe B or C?
Concur. The answer about not growing with mature mahogany supported the notion that loggers, who clear a group of trees would clear trees of the same age. If you negate the answer you'd see it would directly attack this premise. And it was not E.