I just can't see thinking about the sections in the same way. When I'm doing games, I feel like I'm doing a math problem. Not that it's related to math ability, but there is a right and a wrong answer. It could be the visual aspect, but for me, I don't think that's it. I thing that since there are definite strategies for mapping things out and making inferences for games, it's a teachable section.LR, on the other hand, isn't really. I suppose it's related to reading closely, but I think it's more than that.I dunno...I guess it's not something I can really explain. All I can say is that for me, it feels like I'm doing something compeletly different for LR and LG. I think I utilize different skills, etc. I suppose I should have described it as more of a personal experience in my original post, and not just a statement.
I'm with Jacy though my reasoning is a little less sophisticated: when I do games a different part of my brain hurts than when I do arguments. With reading comp, my eyes hurt.
I HATE LOGIC GAMES!!! I dont understand what they are supposed to measure...How does this type of thinking (whatever it is) help one be a lawyer?I just dont get it...I can argue with the best of em...and my ways of thining are always very logical...but these games??? I think its the time constraint that kills me.
Skittles,I think that's one of the best posts I've seen on this board...