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 - halftheloop

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15
121
Studying for the LSAT / argh
« on: October 17, 2007, 08:27:35 PM »
At the end of the year, Wilson's department store awards free merchandise to its top salespeople. When presented with teh fact that the number of salespeople receiving these awards has declined markedly over the past fifteen years, the newly appointed president of the company responded, "In that case, since our award criterion at present is membership in the top third of our sales force, we can also say that the number of salespeople passed over for these awards has similarly declined."

Which one of the following is an assumption that would allow the compnay president's conclusion to be properly drawn?

My answer: Wilson's calculates its salespeople's sales figures in the same way as it did fifteen years ago.
TCR: The criterion used by Wilson's for selecting its award recipients has remained the saem for the past fifteen years. 

I'm confused about this "passed over... declined" wording.  So the president is saying that since the present criteria is being in the top 3rd, not as many people are being rejected?  i'm confused how that makes sense.

122
Studying for the LSAT / Re: clarification of the flaw please?
« on: October 17, 2007, 08:19:48 PM »
gotcha. you are great with explanations, please feel free to answer the (many) other questions i will probably be posting in the near future...!

123
Studying for the LSAT / clarification of the flaw please?
« on: October 17, 2007, 07:55:36 PM »
Government official: Clearly, censorship exists if we, as citizens, are not allowed to communicate what we are ready to communicate at our own expense or if other citizens are not permitted access to our communications at their own expense. Public unwillingness to provide funds for certain kinds of scientific, scholarly, or artistic actvities cannot, therefore, be described as censorship. 

This is a flawed method of reasoning question. I can tell that the flaw is an incorrect negation, and I got the right answer because I was able to identify so, but I'm unclear on how the government official even proceeds with his argument in the 2nd sentence.  What does "public unwillingness to provide funds..." have to do with communicating what we're ready to or if other citizens are not permitted access?  Or is the whole point that he (illogically) thinks that just because what he's talking about is so irrelevant from the sufficient condition in the first statement, it must lead to it not being censorship (using an incorrect negation)?

124
Studying for the LSAT / Re: infants and adults
« on: October 17, 2007, 07:49:30 PM »
People cannot be morally responsible for things over which they have no control.  Therefore, they should not be held morally responsible for any inevitable consequences of such things, either. Determining whether adults have any control over the treatment they are receiving can be difficult. hence in some cases it can be difficult to know whether adults bear any moral responsibility for the way they are treated. Everyone, however, sometimes acts in ways that are an inevitable consequence of treatment received as an infant, and infants clearly cannot control, and so are not morally responsible for, the treatment they receive.

Anyone making the claims above would be logically committed to which of the following further claims?

My Answer:  An infant should never be held morally responsible for an action that infant has performed

TCR: No adult should be held morally responsible for every action he or she performs.

?!?!?!?!  and the difference is....

never mind, just diagrammed and got it

125
Studying for the LSAT / infants and adults
« on: October 17, 2007, 07:39:31 PM »
People cannot be morally responsible for things over which they have no control.  Therefore, they should not be held morally responsible for any inevitable consequences of such things, either. Determining whether adults have any control over the treatment they are receiving can be difficult. hence in some cases it can be difficult to know whether adults bear any moral responsibility for the way they are treated. Everyone, however, sometimes acts in ways that are an inevitable consequence of treatment received as an infant, and infants clearly cannot control, and so are not morally responsible for, the treatment they receive.

Anyone making the claims above would be logically committed to which of the following further claims?

My Answer:  An infant should never be held morally responsible for an action that infant has performed

TCR: No adult should be held morally responsible for every action he or she performs.

?!?!?!?!  and the difference is....

126
Since I'm taking the December LSAT, does it make a difference when I send in my completed application?  For instance, if I were to send in my application fee/forms today vs. the end of November, would that make the ad committee look at my application earlier or do they look at all of them at once, upon having received the actual LSAT report? 

127
Studying for the LSAT / Re: resolving the dispute
« on: October 16, 2007, 10:04:51 PM »
truthfully, still confused... the more and more i look at D and E, the harder it is to remember what the hell i'm looking for and what they're each supposed to match/not match in the stimulus. my mind is mush.

You need to break the argument down:

Premise I: Prehistoric birds were cold-blooded
Premise II:  They were cold-blooded because they had growth rings.  Growth rings <-> Cold-Blooded

Premise I: Prehistoric birds had dense blood vessels.
Premise II:  Dense -> Active, Active -> Warm-Blooded

Does that help?  There's a lot of unnecessary fluff in the original prompt, I agree.  You shouldn't have to read convoluted language like "unlike modern birds."  We couldn't care less about modern birds or previous studies.

"E," again, weakens the first study.  The conditional can't be as air-tight as they pitch it.  Growth rings can also indicate warm-blooded.

perfect, thanks for trimming off the crap, makes much more sense now!

128
Studying for the LSAT / Re: Having trouble with parallel and flaw
« on: October 16, 2007, 09:50:14 PM »
I have the bible but for some reason I still can't get the jist of those two types of questions.  The majority of the time at least three of the answer look good to me, I know this means I am missing something but I just can't figure out what it is.

are you talking about parallel and flawed parallel method of reasoning questions or parallel and identify the flaw in teh method questions?

129
Studying for the LSAT / Re: resolving the dispute
« on: October 16, 2007, 09:47:16 PM »
truthfully, still confused... the more and more i look at D and E, the harder it is to remember what the hell i'm looking for and what they're each supposed to match/not match in the stimulus. my mind is mush.

130
Studying for the LSAT / resolving the dispute
« on: October 16, 2007, 02:42:04 PM »
A recent study concludes that prehistoric birds, unlike modern birds, were cold-blooded.  This challenges a widely held view that modern birds descended from warm-blooded birds. The conclusion is based on the existence of growth rings in prehistoric birds' bodily structures, which are thought to be found only in cold blooded animals.  Another study, however, disputes this view. It concludes taht prehistoric birds had dense blood vessels in their bones, which suggests that tehy were active creatures and therefore had to be warm-blooded.

Question stem: which one of the following, if true, would most help to resolve the dispute described above in favor of one party to it?

I couldn't decide between the two following answers, the second of which is the CORRECT answer:
D) Dense blood vessels are not found in all warm-blooded species
E) In some cold blooded species the gene that is responsible for growth rings is also responsible for dense blood vessels

If you know it, please explain why E is the correct answer, and why D doesn't help resolve the dispute by providing evidence AGAINST the study (in the last sentence) that `concluded the prehistoric birds had to be warm blooded. 

Thanks in advance.

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15