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 - PNym

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 73
41
Studying for the LSAT / Necessary Principle LR Problem
« on: November 15, 2007, 08:33:00 PM »
Stim:
Trade official: Country X deserves economic retribution for its protectionism. However, it is crucial that we recognize that there are overriding considerations in this case. We should still sell to X the agricultural equipment it ordered; there is high demand in our country for agricultural imports from X.

QStem:
The argument depends on assuming which one of the following principles?

TCR:
We should balance the justice of an action with the consequences for our interests of undertaking that action.

My answer:
We should never jeopardize the interests of our people to punish a protectionist country.

Is my answer wrong because it's a sufficient assumption, not a necessary one?

42
Studying for the LSAT / Confusing TRC for LR problem
« on: November 12, 2007, 05:08:22 PM »
Stimulus:
One can never tell whether another person is acting from an ulterior motive; therefore, it is impossible to tell whether someone's action is moral, and so one should evaluate the consequences of an action rather than its morality.

Stem:
Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the reasoning above?

TCR:
The intention of an action is indispensible for an evaluation of its morality.

How does this correct response strengthen the argument? I thought the stimulus explicitly mentioned that it's impossible to evaluate the morality of the action, therefore morality plays no part evaluating the action.

Is it correct because it shows that because the intention is not discernable, the morality is not discernable?

43
Studying for the LSAT / Re: HARDEST LSAT QUESTIONS
« on: November 11, 2007, 05:46:45 PM »
I always found the math problems easy, although students seem to have a world of difficulty with them.

Definitely agree on the dioxin/fish/mill weaken question, that one's tough.

Don't recall the bee vision question.  I'll have to look it up.  2003 seems like a hard year overall.

Key to the bee question is realizing that the stimulus describes two causal relationships: bee vision caused flower development and flower color didn't cause bee vision development. TCR affirms the latter relationship.

The bee vision question is on 13-66.

44
Studying for the LSAT / Preptest 18 (Dec 92) RC passage 3, Question 20
« on: November 11, 2007, 05:06:46 PM »
I don't understand how TCR (AC-D) undermines McLoughlin's account. Couldn't a revival have taken place prior to the missionaries' arrival, then another taken place afterwards?

45
Studying for the LSAT / Re: Beginning of trend of increasing RC difficulty?
« on: November 11, 2007, 12:39:35 AM »
Maize and C4 Photosynthesis is pretty brutal.  I agree that Basins of Attraction isn't all that bad.

God, I can't believe I missed 3 on that passage. I learned of those mechanisms in intro bio, and again in biochem. UGHHH!!

(I thought the African art distribution passage was was tougher to understand, but surprisingly didn't miss any problems on that passage. Go figure.)

46
Studying for the LSAT / Re: Beginning of trend of increasing RC difficulty?
« on: November 11, 2007, 12:37:45 AM »
My instructor mentioned that the answer choices have gotten longer, and more of them deal with analogies, "logically completing X paragraph," and overall organization of a passage or a paragraph.

I also noticed that some of the subject matter is becoming more abstract, as opposed to empirical (e.g. dealing with sociological categorizations).

The word count test specs per section and per test have not really changed since June of 1991.  The passages are of the same length ranges and so are the answer choices.  Abstract subject matter is nothing new.

Passage and paragraph organization questions are nothing new and their frequency does not seem to have really changed markedly. 

A bit more emphasis on points of view expressed or implied being tested in the questions now as compared to before.

There have not been any killer RC passages in years the likes of Denise Meyerson / CLS (Dec. '99 - that one is a killer) or the water bugs one (micropterous / macropterous wings - 1991 or 1992 I think)

Many people complain about the basins of attraction passage from last year, but it is really not bad once you get past the abstract intimidating nature of it.


What was the Denise Meyerson passage? And are you sure that the length of the answer choices has not appreciably changed since the earlier LSATs? My instructor was pretty explicit in pointing out the increased length of the answer choices in the newer passages.

47
Studying for the LSAT / Re: Beginning of trend of increasing RC difficulty?
« on: November 10, 2007, 07:28:12 PM »
My instructor mentioned that the answer choices have gotten longer, and more of them deal with analogies, "logically completing X paragraph," and overall organization of a passage or a paragraph.

I also noticed that some of the subject matter is becoming more abstract, as opposed to empirical (e.g. dealing with sociological categorizations).

48
Studying for the LSAT / Re: isn't this an incorrect negation??
« on: November 10, 2007, 03:27:09 PM »
Many things that are common flaws can have appropriate usages as well.

For example, it is often inappropriate to appeal to an authority on the LSAT because usually the "authority" appeal to is speaking outside their realm of expertise, but should an argument ask a physicist about gravity, that would be okay.

Similarly, it would be a flaw if the argument tells you there are two options, rules one out, and concludes that it MUST be the other option if the argument never established that they were the ONLY two options (then it would be a valid argument).

In this case, you are seeing a time where what appears to be a flaw is actually being used properly.  Normally you are correct that it is a flaw to say that

A --> B  therefore if not A --> not B.

However, when dealing with comparative statements it is not necessarily a flaw.  For example, if I tell you that the person who studies the most always does the best on the LSAT, then it must follow that if you don't study the most, you won't be the person who does the best.

Isn't the stimulus actually describing a cause-and-effect relationship? That few social roles causes social stability, therefore the absence of few social roles (many social roles) causes the absence of social stability?

49
Studying for the LSAT / Beginning of trend of increasing RC difficulty?
« on: November 10, 2007, 03:22:14 PM »
My prep course instructor claims that the RC section has become markedly more difficult in recent exams. Comparing RC sections of earlier exams (1993) to later ones (2005), I can see that this characterization is likely to be true. However, he wasn't able to provide a specific year in which this trend began. Does anyone have this information?

50
My Walgreens digital timer stopped sounding its alarm, and I'd rather not risk buying another similar digital timer from a different drugstore, which is why I'm interested in buying this product.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 73