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 - Question

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 16
Why Matt?  Why???  :'(

Studying for the LSAT / Re: As the story goes...
« on: December 05, 2004, 04:51:40 PM »
Wasn't it obvious?  Dude goes skiing, has fun, ends up breaking leg...  "All's well that ends well"?


Didn't you get 168 in October...  I swear there's a thread back there somewhere saying such things...

Studying for the LSAT / Re: "The Curve"
« on: December 05, 2004, 02:23:51 PM »
I think they're'll be a lot of high scores and they'll have to compensate with a rough curve...  The December group should be no more intelligent than any other group, it's only the test that may have been easier.  Or maybe our sample is unrepresentative and a lot of our second-timers are simply doing better.

I wonder if the books out there are having the opposite of their intended effect, I wonder if they're making it more difficult to get an awesome mark because, all of a sudden, everybody's scoring better.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: 3 HARD LR'S
« on: December 05, 2004, 11:07:52 AM »
There was also a question about non-fiction, author, best-seller...  Although it might have been on the experimental.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: principle question about etiquette
« on: December 05, 2004, 10:58:58 AM »
I don't know, shouldn't the name-callers be "moderating" themselves according to the rules of etiquette.  Also, there was something in the stimulus about the rules only applying in specific situations and I was wondering if these rules might not apply to a debate.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Which games are experimental?
« on: December 05, 2004, 10:45:52 AM »
These 4 had to be the real ones because there the only one's I had.,16217.0.html

Studying for the LSAT / Re: LR section
« on: December 04, 2004, 06:06:04 PM »
the one about the f-ing cod with the screwed up fins and 3 percent -- the question was which one was no trelavant question to ask...and it was like*t i cant remember

Humans contract problems from...

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Just checking in...(comments on dec 04 lsat)
« on: December 04, 2004, 04:40:14 PM »
Hey Matt,

I thought you got a 168 on the October test...  Didn't you say that you made the threshold for UofA?

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Oct 2004 LR Question
« on: December 03, 2004, 12:51:51 PM »
Right, I agree.  Note the word "consistent."

Basically, if you read the E's argument, he's says "their occurrence together" makes it probable he's right.

So he's claiming RE slump *and* car slump -> unhealthy.

Use the contrapositive.  So not unhealthy (healthy) -> not (RE slump *and* car slump), i.e. (D).

This is how I worked the problem

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 16