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 - Visual Dictionary

Pages: 1 ... 26 27 28 29 30 [31] 32 33 34 35
I'm serious.  How do you impress members of the opposite sex with your legal eye?

Studying for the LSAT / Assumption Question from the late 90's
« on: September 04, 2007, 09:20:16 PM »

If a person walks rather than drives, there is one less vehicle polluting.  Therefore, if people walked whenever it's feasible for them, then pollution would be reduced.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

(The conditionals are fairly straightforward, but the answers are less so.)

C)  Walking is the only feasible alternative to driving that results in a reduction in pollution.

E) People sometimes drive when it is feasible to walk instead.

Negated, "E" turns into "People never drive when it is feasible to walk instead," but I still don't understand why it's the right answer.


I've been working on the LSAT since June now, and some of you know me from my regular posting, but I'm looking for some extra motivation before the 29th.  I thought that a study partner(s) might help.

We could meet anywhere in Newark or Manhattan, like the public library, a Starbuck's, or even Port Authority.

Studying for the LSAT / Deceptively Simple Sufficient Assumption Question
« on: September 04, 2007, 06:43:08 PM »

Is it just me or are the 1993/94/95 LR problems much more straightforward, though just as tricky?

Here's #23 from PrepTest, as paraphrased by yours truly:

A poor farmer once said: "You're either rich or poor, and either honest or dishonest.  All poor farmers are honest.  Therefore, all rich farmers are dishonest."

The farmer's conclusion is properly drawn if the argument assumes that:

A)  Every honest farmer is poor.
C)  Everyone who is dishonest is a rich farmer.

In my diagram:

R/P and H/~H

P <-> H

R -> ~H

How does "A" fit it better than "C," my choice?

I'm still having some trouble with sufficient assumption questions.  If anyone can find a guide to diagramming, then that would be astounding.

Studying for the LSAT / Logic Buffs: Negating "Any"
« on: September 04, 2007, 05:57:01 PM »
I recently came across PrepTest B in my Superprep book, where Section I's problem 23 presented me with an obstacle:

"Tilling by any method other than deep tillage is not a viable option."

I thought I would negate it into:

"Tilling by any method other than deep tillage is a viable option."

But LSAC says that the proper negation is "Tilling by some method . . . ."

Can anyone explain why?

Studying for the LSAT / Ouch
« on: September 03, 2007, 10:28:53 AM »

The comparative reading in this RC section is just pure pain.

Studying for the LSAT / Nothing Like Labor Day Weekend with the LSAT!
« on: September 02, 2007, 12:46:37 PM »
Ah, I'm just going to lay on the New Jersey grass with a gelid drink and my SuperPrep book in preparation for Sept. 29!


13.  Politician:  The bill that makes talking on car phones while driving illegal should be adopted.  My support of this bill is because of a concern for public safety.  Using a car phone awfully distracts the driver, which poses a threat to safe driving.  People would be deterred from using their car phones while driving if it were illegal to do so.

A)  The more attention one pays to driving, the safer a driver one is.
B)  The only way to reduce the threat to public safety posed by car phones is through legislation.
C)  Some distractions interfere with one’s ability to safely operate an automobile.
D)  Any proposed law that would reduce a threat to public safety should be adopted.
E)  Car phone use by passengers does not distract the driver of the car.

Any clue?

I'm just curious.  How representative are we of the kids you'll meet on test day?  Does the average test-taker review necessary/sufficient conditions in their sleep, or do they just hope for the best after Kaplan told them that their wrong answers are "out-of-scope"?


Although I've had a few times that I thought I solved the LR section with 100% accuracy, I usually tend to miss 2 or 3.

When I review my mistakes, they make sense.  Usually they're careless, like forgetting to negate all the answers in an assumption question, or picking a "flaw-in-the-argument" because it superficially resembles the prompt, not the flaw.

This tendency is obviously stressful for test day.  How would you eliminate it?

Citing a source for this logical factoid would be helpful.  I'm always bemused by how far I should go on must-be-true questions and RC passages.

Pages: 1 ... 26 27 28 29 30 [31] 32 33 34 35