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 - mentor

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7
Studying for the LSAT / For kits44
« on: October 26, 2007, 03:28:12 PM »
A bit on conditional logic:
If we have an affirmation A--> B
then the inverse is what you call the incorrect negation !A --> !B
converse is what you call the incorrect reversal B --> A.

Yes, these two are contrapositives of one another; no, they are not inverses of one another.

The answer to the rest of your question is essentially yes, with one caveat: if you're diagramming parallel flaw questions, you need to know which is which.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Having problems with Dec 2005, Game 4
« on: October 26, 2007, 11:39:36 AM »
It could.  You have to keep that rule in mind when picking answer choices.  The reason it might not mislead is that for every question in which it comes up, two AC's look OK based on the linked option scenario; one will have T and L on the same stage, one won't.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Having problems with Dec 2005, Game 4
« on: October 25, 2007, 11:37:45 PM »
Not all 8.  Draw them with linked options:


etc.  That's enough to blaze through the questions and will take you far less time on the setup.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Having problems with Dec 2005, Game 4
« on: October 25, 2007, 06:53:25 PM »
I'd set it up as two tiers, one each for the N and S stage, by time:

N __ __ __ _X
S _X __ __ __
   6  8 10 12

The placement of P in N6 or S12 then leads into scenarios, where H/L or Q/T inhabit the 10 slots.

Considering manna was a food, it doesn't even make sense. 

send it over

Well, my SAT math score correlates perfectly using the method with my LSAT score, so everybody else's should too.

You're confused.  The word is actually 'reguiring' - no second 'e' - and doesn't exist as a noun.

Sure it could.  The ability to follow a mathematical process and the ability to follow a logical process, which is what LR boils down to, could be very related.  That doesn't mean that V doesn't correlate, just that M does.

First, very rough draft.  280 words.  Takers?

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Quick question about formal logic
« on: October 24, 2007, 01:17:10 AM »
It usually indicates 'some,' although I suppose it could, in a highly context-dependent proposition, be treated as a 'not all.'

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7