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 - eslite119

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6
Studying for the LSAT / Re: PT 54 -- the infamous RC section
« on: October 02, 2008, 06:59:10 PM »
Just did this test today.  Scary thing about this RC section was that I had this feeling while doing the section that I was doing so well as I was confident that answers I chose were right.  Well, the answer key told me that was not the case.  "W" "T" "F"

I made up the loss by doing well on games and LRs, but that groupthink passage was a bit of shock.  I do not envy those who actually took this test in June and I respect anyone who got less than four wrong on this section.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: pt 53 sect 1 q19--parallel reasoning
« on: October 01, 2008, 09:40:44 PM »
I took this test earlier this week.  If I remember correctly the stimulus uses the word "generally" when talking about the habitual sleepers having a reduction in anxiety.  Thus, the correct answer choice needs to match "generally" with the first group.  I believe answer choice A uses the word "typically".

Actually it's the stimulus that uses the word "typically" and choice A uses the word "generally."
I have couple explanations for this one and I must admit that I had to take an educated guess between A and B.

The premises and conclusions in both stimulus and choice A uses such words as "typically," "generally," and "probably."

Stimulus Premise: "People who have habitually slept less than six hours a night and then begin sleeping eight or more hours a night typically begin to feel much less anxious."

Choice A: "When a small company first begin to advertise on the Internet, its financial situation generally improves."

NOW, compare those two premises to the one below:

Choice B: "Certain small companies that had never previously advertised on the Internet have found that their financial situation began to improve after they started to do so."

Notice that there are no words like "typically," "generally," and "probably."

If I had said "Posting in this thread will cause you to get the score you want on the Oct LSAT," you could weaken my argument by:

a. Showing that people can get the score they want without posting in this thread.
b. Showing that people who have posted in this thread did not get the score they want.
c. Showing that posting in this thread and getting the score you want are actually both caused by being an obsessive LSAT student.
d. Showing that getting the score you want on the Oct LSAT actually causes you to post in this thread (doesn't apply here).
e. Showing that the data I used to reach this conclusion is flawed.

I choose A.

i.e) Only when behaviors become typical among an animal population can we conclude that genetic alteration has occurred in that variety of species.

I would negate it as "We can conclude that genetic alteration has occurred even when bahaviors have not yet become typical among the animal population."

I get there just by examining the meaning of the statement, and then trying to state the logical opposite.

This is how I learned to negate from TM.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Prep test 25 - question 18 sectioin IV
« on: September 30, 2008, 09:03:50 AM »
This is justify the conclusion, and the correct answer choice should SUFFICIENTLY allow the conclusion to be properly drawn in conncetion with the premises given in the stimulus.  The conclusion is, "We cannot in any real sense mistreat plants."  You need to justify this conclusion using the premise given.  


Premise 1:  Plants do not have nervous system.

Plants -> ~NS (Nervous System)

Premise 2:  Having a nervous system is necessary to experience pain.

Pain -> NS

Conclusion: We cannot in any real sense mistreat plants.

Plants -> ~Mistreat

Based on the premises given and looking at the conclusion, you'll note that there is a "jump."  Something is missing and just with the information within the stimulus alone will not allow one to arrive at the conclusion that "Plant cannot be mistreated."  

Try connecting premise 1 and 2 by using the contrapositive for premise 2:

Premise 2 contrapositive: ~NS -> ~Pain

Connect premise 2 and 1: Plants -> ~NS -> ~Pain

Looking at answer choice D, it says "Only organisms that can experience pain can be mistreated."

D:  Mistreat -> Pain

Contrapositive: ~Pain -> ~Mistreat

Connect this contrapositive to the premise 1 and 2, and you get:

Plants -> ~NS -> ~Pain -> ~Mistreat

Or by transitive property:

Plants -> ~Mistreat (OUR CONCLUSION)

Note that choice D includes ALL ORGANISM, which is not necessary for us to reach the conclusion, but it is SUFFICIENT for us to reach the conclusion noted in the stimulus.  On the side note, other choice like "Only organisms with nervous system can be mistreated" can also work.

Choice B is incorrect since it's somewhat of a repeat of premise 2.  We needed something to bridge the jump between the premises and conclusion.  Hope this helps.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Best info in RC bible
« on: September 28, 2008, 03:30:59 PM »
Is VIEWSTAMP just stuff like bracketing definitions, circling unusual words, noting examples, etc.?

Not exactly.  It's actually an acronym for specific key elements that test takers should look for when reading a passage.  I do not know the forum rules for actually describing what the VIEWSTAMP is, but if I'm allowed I have no problem explanining it.  Powerscore might not like the idea though.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: PrepTest 42, section 2, number 18
« on: September 28, 2008, 03:23:08 PM »
You did really well to do this by memory.  Yeah I got the causal relation between the two, and yes you're right that the correct answer is A: I just don't get it yet.  I've really not had problems with causal reasoning, but for some reason this one was getting to me, but this is helping a little.

I'm not that genius to solve this problem just by memory; I had to look it up.  However, the answer keys to the copies of PTs I have has some issues, especially the 40+ PTs.  Also, my PTs seem to be mislabeled (again, 40+ PTs).

Back to the question, if all else fails you can always resort to POE.  In this case, it actually works pretty well.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Best info in RC bible
« on: September 28, 2008, 11:19:33 AM »
I learned majority of the materials covered in RC Bible from BP.  Personally, when it comes to marking the passage, I think BP does a better job than RC Bible (way too much markings).  On the other hand, RC Bible's analysis of each passages covered is impressive.

The book heavily emphasize their VIEWSTAMP technique, which I think is the most important thing that test takers should be aware of.  I'm currently re-reading chapter 8 as it contains great information.

On the downside, I think they copy-pasted a good portion from LRB.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: PrepTest 42, section 2, number 18
« on: September 28, 2008, 10:54:53 AM »
Is this question about bee's vision?  If so, then I believe the answer is A (please double check for me if I'm correct since my answer key is messed up last time I checked).

Main point of the stimulus is that bee's vision did not develop in response to flowers' colors, but it is probably the opposite.  Sorta like cause and effect, but the author believes the cause and effect is actually reversed; flowers' color developed in response to bee's behavior.

Flowers' color --caused -> Bee's Vision  X

Bee's Vision --caused -> Flower's color O

Answer choice A introduces a new information indicating that other insects that have vision VERY SIMILAR to that of bee's and it does not depend on object's color (including flower, perhaps).  This actually aligns with the second cause and effect diagram that I displayed above and as a result, it tends to strengthen the argument made in the stimulus.  In other words, information given in answer choice A makes it less probable that the first cause and effect diagram displayed above is true.

I hope this helps at least a little.

Superprep LGs are pretty tough, even the linear games.  Although I got everything correct, it took me more efforts to finish the section in 35 minutes.  Not to brag or anything, but just wanted to confirm your statement.  As Thales indicated, recent LGs are easier.  If you want practice, try focusing on some earlier PTs in addition to LG Bible.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6