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 - Waiting for Those Letters

Pages: 1 ... 22 23 24 25 26 [27]
Studying for the LSAT / Re: A couple questions for you games gurus.
« on: November 07, 2007, 10:49:56 AM »
wow, that really helped me a lot! thanks!
something that i noticed that helps me personally is the following:
 In game 2 of october 2004, number two problem is a must be true queston. My set up did not really give me info on what the correct answer would be b/c the answer choices were so general. So, I skipped it and went on to the rest of the problems giving priority to the if questions and the could be questions. Then, in literally 3 seconds  ( after having finished the rest of the questions) I was able to solve that number two must be question b/c I had hypotheticals from the other questions that I was able to use to cross of the wrong answers and also by that time I was totally comfortable about how the game works and restrictions associated with it.
so, of course, you should come up with as many inferences as you can in the first few minutes of the game but should also, i suggest,  take the order of the questions into account as well.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: A couple questions for you games gurus.
« on: November 07, 2007, 10:24:34 AM »
I'm glad someone started this thread- b/c I also seem to have the same trouble with the setup. I spend so much time trying to get all the inferences and mind you, I get all the answers right- but that at the expense of the time limit.

I went through the Logic Bible, but still unsure about something:

My question for the professionals here if you can give some general tips on when to know if you should make the templates/master the posibilities vs. making hypotheticals . I, for example, did  5 templates for the October 2004 test on game 1 and got all the questions right and then looked at the explanations  ( The 2004 LSATs Deconstructed) and saw that they did not do that. Instead they did a hypothetical for almost all of the questions

Can someone explain this to me? I did the sufficient/necessary diagram. But, it did not help to figure out the correct answer.

Agricultural economist: We can increase agricultural production without reducing biodiversity, but only if we abandon conventional agriculture. Thus, if we choose to sustain economic growth, which requires increasing agricultural production, we should radically modify agricultural techniques.

Which of the following  principles, if valid, most help to justify the agricultural economists's reasoning?

Credited Response: Economic growth should not be pursued at the expense of a loss of biodiversity.

The other answer choices: a) agricultural production should be reduced if doing so would increase biodiversity.
                           c) economic growth should be sustained only as long as agricultural production continues to increase.
                           d) preserving biodiversity is no more important than increasing agricultural production.
                           e) agricultural techniques should be radically modified only if doing so would further the extent to which we can increase agricultural production.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Strengthen question
« on: November 06, 2007, 03:15:51 PM »
The key to the correct answer is first in the bolded phrase in "environmental policies that excessively restrict the use of natural resources may diminish the wealth necessary to adopt and sustain the policies that brought about these improvements" and second in the word "largely" in the correct answer choice.

The assumption from those who reject the claim is that the reason the enivornemntal policies would excessibely restrict the use of natural resources might diminsh the wealth.... is that the nations greatly depend on the industrial use of the natural recourse to sustain their wealth.

So, essentially, you had to strengthen the excessively restrict phrase in the argument.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: 3.92 GPA and 155 LSAT
« on: November 02, 2007, 04:38:09 PM »
Thanks for the encouragement!

Studying for the LSAT / Re: 3.92 GPA and 155 LSAT
« on: November 02, 2007, 11:04:14 AM »
Yes, Yeshiva University's law school is what I am refering to. In fact, one of you guys mentioned I have a chance for the part-time program, and that's specifically the one I want to go to. It's starts in May.
My race, someone asked: I am a Persian Jew. I think that's irrelevant in the decision-making process.
I did tons of prep. I started in July with a 138 on my very first diag. Now, I am at 158 mark. I wrote 155, cuz on test day I would assume my score would go down at least a few points.

I am planning to take the Dec test, and I am doing two timed prep tests a day and analyzing my results. So, perhaps, I can go up a few more points???

I would be so happy to get into Cardozo... I'm a little obsessed...

Studying for the LSAT / Re: 3.92 GPA and 155 LSAT
« on: November 02, 2007, 09:48:33 AM »
You are right, a 170 would do wonders. However, I was kind of aiming for Cardoza Law. But, it seems that probably won't be a reality either with this current lsat score.

Studying for the LSAT / 3.92 GPA and 155 LSAT
« on: November 01, 2007, 11:26:59 PM »
Can they get me into some decent aba-approved law school? Please be brutally honest. Thanks.

« on: October 31, 2007, 07:16:47 PM »
THANKS SO MUCH !!!!!!!!!!! You guys are the best!!

« on: October 31, 2007, 06:10:52 PM »
Is it just me that cannot figure why the answers to the following two stimuli are correct?

first one: people today place an especially high value on respect for others; yet, in their comedy acts, many of today's most popular comedians display blatant disrespect for others. But, when people fail to live up to the very ideals they hold in highest esteem, exaggeration of such failings often forms the basis of successful comedy. Thus, the current popularity of comedians who display disrespect in their acts is hardly suprising.

the assumption depends on which of the following:
correct answer: People who value an idea especially highly do not always succeed in living up to this ideal.

2. Brown dwarfs- dim red stars that are too cool to burn hydrogen- are very similar in appearance tp red dwarf stars, which are just hot enough to burn hydrogen. Stars, when first formed, contain substantial amounts of the element lithium. All stars but the coolest of the brown dwarfs are hot enough to destroy lithium completely by converting it to lithium. Accordingly, any star found that contains no lithium is not one of these collest brown dwarfs.

question: the argument depends on assuming which of the following?

correct answer: None of the coolest brown dwarfs has ever been hot enough to destroy lithium.

Pages: 1 ... 22 23 24 25 26 [27]