Really good advice, Earlcat.
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 - ssilver0210
« on: January 06, 2008, 10:12:13 PM »
There's really no reason why you shouldn't start studying early. It may not be necessary to start so early, but I can't see how it could possibly hurt. Just read over a few supplements, start working out some questions. Then as the test approaches, start putting more time into studying. Right now is a chance to start studying with very little pressure. Might as well take advantage of it.
In this case, disrespect for others= the exaggeration of the failings of those who fail to live up to very ideals that they hold in highest regard.
It's stated in conclusion that the current popularity of comedians who display disrespect for others is hardly surprising.
Let's assume that choice D stated the opposite of what it states. It would state that people who value an ideal especially highly always live up to that ideal. If that were true, than the popularity of comedians who display disrespect for others would be very surprising, because, under the definition of disrespect as stated in the setup, they would have no basis for disrespecting anyone.
Therefore, the argument falls apart if choice D is viewed in its opposite. Because that's true, it's also true that choice D is an assumption of which the critic's argument depends.
"Why should I think that you will be able to get me where I want to go if you've never been there yourself?"
You shouldn't. But I offer you this, when you're having trouble with a question, ask for my assistance. If after I provide you with the assistance, you feel like you better understand the problem, then you'll have a basis for thinking I might be able to get you where you want to go. Until then, you should be skeptical.
This is why I offer a free session. I believe I can prove myself as someone who can help people who are planning to take the LSAT, and if I can't then I don't want them to have to pay me a cent.
« on: December 31, 2007, 07:26:19 PM »
Jeffort: Some LSAT logic
Your conclusion is only valid if it's true that only those who own that specific book are competent LSAT tutors.
Of course, that's an assumption, and without proving the validity of that assumptions, your conclusion is false.
So, the argument is fairly weak.
A politician can neither be reelected nor avoid censure if the politician is involved in a scandal. In other words, if the politician is involved in a scandal, then the politician will not get reelected, AND the politician will not avoid censure.
On the other hand, let's assume it said a politician will only avoid censure if he is not reelected. In that case, it's an "or" rather than an "and". The politician will either get reelected or avoid censure. He can't get get reelected AND avoid censure.
I didn't expect such harsh responses.
Jaffrey: You're absolutely correct about proving competency prior to expecting anyone to pay for tutoring. That is why I offer a free session. After the first session, if I haven't proven myself, it's highly unlikely that anyone would want to continue paying me for future tutoring. I'm providing an hour of tutoring, rather than simply answering a question here or there on this board.
I don't know; each section presents its own skill sets that need to be developed, so treating each individual section separately has benefited some of my students. I've taught all three sections, but many students have asked me to tutor them in the reading comprehension, and argument sections of the exam. Because I've tutored those sections extensively, I consider them my specialties in regard to the LSAT.