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.

Topics - dubsy

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 20 21 22 [23] 24 25 26 27 28
Studying for the LSAT / isn't this an incorrect negation??
« on: October 29, 2007, 09:08:39 AM »
In preagricultural societies, social roles were few and were easily predicted for each phase of a person's life. Accordingly, interpersonal relations, although not always pleasant or fair, were stable and predictable.  modern society, onthe other hand, has thousands of different social roles. Technology and consumerism require that each of us fill highly particularized niches, and these niches are differentiating at an astonishng pace. Therefore _______.

Which one ofthe following most logically completes the argument?

TCR: Interpersonal relations in modern societies are less stable and less predictable than they were in preagricultural societies.

I got this right through POE and it was definitely better than all the other ACs, but isn't this actually an incorrect negation? 

Studying for the LSAT / for June/September 2007 test takers
« on: October 28, 2007, 10:07:45 PM »
what did you guys think of the double reading passage? significantly harder? anything to do prepare for it?

i know it's ungraded, but is that something that i should practice at some point?

i was at 171 a month ago... climbed ecstatically to a happy 176 and was staying there... but ever since, although I've been taking tons of practice tests, my score has not consistently increased or even stayed in the high 170s and has just bounced around anywhere between 171-176. ok, i guess that might be considered sort of consistent but i woudl really like 175+ range-consistency. what can i do to improve at this point???  i really want to be scoring consistently in the high 170s by mid november so that i can be safe with a few point drop on test day... i think if i could just nail RC i'd be golden... arghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh hhhh

Studying for the LSAT / repressors 2N question
« on: October 28, 2007, 06:36:48 PM »
Repressors - people who unconsciously inhibit their display of emotion - exhibit significant increases in heart rate when they encounter emotion-provoking situations.  Nonrepressors have similar physiological responses when they encounter such situations and consciously inhibit their display of emotion. Thus the very act of inhibiting displays of emotion, whether done consciously or unconsciously, causes a sharp rise in heart rate.

which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?

couldn't choose between...
A) encountering an emotion provoking situation is not sufficient to cause nonrepressors' heart rates to rise sharply

E) In situations that do not tend to provoke emotions, the average heart rate of repressors is the same as that of nonrepressors.

Answer is A. Someone please explain why?

Studying for the LSAT / practical joker
« on: October 28, 2007, 05:22:04 PM »
Franklin: the only clue I have as to the identity of the practical joker is the handwriting on the note. Ordinarily I would suspect Miller, who has always been jealous of me, but the handwriting is not hers. So the joker is apparently someone else.

Which one of the following provides the strongest grounds for criticizing Franklin's reasoning?

TCR: It fails to consider the possibility that there was more than one practical joker.

I understand this, and I did get it right, but can someone show me exactly why the following answer is wrong ? (I was deliberating between these two)

B: it fails to indicate the degree to which handwriting samples should look alike in order to be considered of the same source.  <-- this one confused me, because I thought hey, maybe Franklin should clarify how much handwriting has to look alike to prove it is/isn't someone else's, because how do we know Miller didn't FAKE the handwriting? 

Clarification please?

Studying for the LSAT / 2N question
« on: October 28, 2007, 05:17:05 PM »
Investment banker: Democracies require free-market capitalist economies, because a more controlled economy is incompatible with complete democracy. But history shows that repressive measures against certain capitalistic developments are required during the transition from a totalitarian regime to a democracy. Thus, people who bemoan the seemingly anticapitalistic measures certain governments are currently taking are being hasty.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the i-banker's argument?

TCR: The nations whose anticapitalistic measures the people in question bemoan had totalitarian regimes in the recent past. 

So I got this one right, but I'm not exactly clear on TCR.  Isn't the investment banker's main flaw that he assumes that the "bemoaning people" are in a country that is even IN that transition from a totalitarian regime to a democracy?  so his assumption is grander than them just having had a totalitarian regime - he's assuming that they're moving from a totalitarian to a DEMOCRATIC regime too, isn't he? could that be another possible answer - that he assumes the "nations whose anticapitalistic measures the people in question bemoan will necessarily be moving towards a democracy in the future"?

Studying for the LSAT / Strengthen question
« on: October 28, 2007, 02:48:00 PM »
I got this one right through POE but I don't really get why the answer is right. Someone please explain?

Everyone likes repertory theater. Actors like it because playing different roles each night decrease their boredom. Stagehands like it because changing sets every night means more overtime and higher pay. Theater managers like it because, if plays that reflect audience demand are chosen for production, most performances generate large revenues. It is evident, therefore, that more theaters should change to repertory.

The argument above would be strengthened if which one of the following were true?

TCR: In a repertory theater, plays can be rescheduled to meet audience demand.


When is "only" a necessary condition? when it's preceded by "the"?  or are both necessary conditions?

here's an example of a problem i had trouble with:
People who have doctorates in the liberal arts are interested in improving their intellects. Copmanies, however, rarely hire people who are not concerned with the financial gain that can be obtained by hard work in teh business world. As a result, companies rarely hire people who have doctorates in the liberal arts.

The conclusion of the argument follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?

I thought it was: The only people not interested in making money in teh business world are people who are interested in improving their intellects.

Correct answer: Only people not concerned with making money in the business world are interested in improving their intellects.

Clearly, the "the" makes a big difference! Could someone please diagram and explain this problem, and also a general principle in terms of approaching "Only" vs. "The Only" in diagramming?  Thanks so much!!

Studying for the LSAT / Powerscore LG setups since 2002?
« on: October 27, 2007, 02:23:38 PM »
are they available anywhere? online? new editions?

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 20 21 22 [23] 24 25 26 27 28