Cooley's own rankings will concur with the BOD's rankings, and prove that Cooley was right all along...
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 - Dionysus0
University of Colorado-Denver GPA 3.7 Expected LSAT 164+
1. University of Washington - Best school in the Pacific Northwest. Would love to live in Seattle or Portland. This school has a good enough reputation (I think) for me to do either with ease. I would not consider any other school if accepted here.
2. Seattle University - Great location and have a strong interest to practice public interest law, no desire for Big Law.
3. University of Wisconsin - Best school in Wisconsin and I love Wisconsin sports teams.
4. University of Oregon - Would consider Lewis and Clark, but it does not sound like they have much to offer besides environmental law. Great location.
5. Marquette - Respectable school and I could go to a lot of Milwaukee Brewers' games while I attend school and post graduation, unsure of how long I would like to stay in Wisconsin for.
Honorable Mention: Lewis and Clark
All schools preferences are based on location and trying not to accumulate a lot of debt in college. Hopefully like in the state of Colorado an amount of school debt is forgiven if you pursue public interest law.
Why did this post have to degenerate from interesting anecdotes to whether people can be both good looking and beautiful? There were plenty of good looking women at my test center and fortunately I was seated far away from them.
I appreciate the responses. I have to remember to put the new term in the conclusion as the sufficient part in the conditional statement of the additional premise. Everyone gets point, but Jeffort gets all the bonus points for the detailed response and including a wookie? in his post.
I need some help on this question; most of the answers appear the same to me. Could someone please explain why the credited answer is the only correct one?
24. No mathematical proposition can be proven true by observation. It follows that it is impossible to know any mathematical proposion to be true.
The conclusion follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?
Correct answer (E) Knowing a proposition to be true requires proving it true by obervation.
My incorrect answer selected (C) If a proposition can be proven true by observation, then it can be known to be true.
Extra points for someone who can explain what is wrong with the answer I selected.
Off of Preptest 22 Section 4 Question 21
Someone help me understand the credited answer, it feels like I am reading Being and Time.
Thanks in advance.
Terry: Some actions considered to be bad by our society have favorable consequences. But an action is good only if it has favorable consequences. So, some actions considered to be bad by or society are actually good.
Pat: I agree with your conclusion, but not with the reasons you give for it. Some good actions actually do not have favorable consequences. But no actions considered to be bad by our society have favorable consequences, so your conclusion, that some actions our society considers bad are actually, still holds.
Which one of the following correctly describes both an error in Terry's reasoning and an error in Pat's reasoning?
D) presupposing that if an action's having a certain property is necessary for its being certain type of action, then having that property is sufficient for being that type of action.