# Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

### Poll

#### Now that you've read the LGB/LRB, how closely do you follow their methods?

Word-for-word. I follow the steps they give for each problem, and think in their terms (e.g. "not-laws," "stem families")
2 (16.7%)
Somewhat. I use their elements unaltered (e.g. diagramming techniques), but I don't go step-by-step.
9 (75%)
Not much. I've worked some of what the books teach into my own method, but I've made it my own and don't use their step-by-step methods.
1 (8.3%)
Not at all. The books were good for information about the tests, but I haven't changed my techniques at all.
0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 10

### AuthorTopic: Logic Games/Logical Reasoning Bibles: Are you a Strict Constructionist?  (Read 1537 times)

#### Electric Counterpoint

• Sr. Citizen
• Posts: 441
• Harvard 2010
##### Logic Games/Logical Reasoning Bibles: Are you a Strict Constructionist?
« on: April 26, 2006, 05:29:18 PM »
For maximum statistical fun, post your score(s) when you describe how closely you're following the LGB/LRB dogma

I'm not really going through the Bibles' instructions line-for-line when I practice. I read the LGB over the course of about five months (during school), so a lot of it isn't fresh. I learned important facts about the games, setups, and questions, but never got a comprehensive method that works for me. I've never, for instance, actually "Found the Patern/PossibilitiesTM" in an actual prep test.

I'm the same way with the LRB, though I've just started it this week: I see there are, what, nine primary goals and thirteen stem types? I'm just not thinking in those terms when I go through the test. Even if I start the first LR section seeing distinct premises and conclusions and question families, by the end I'm in my original, more-or-less untrained mode.

I'm not sure this is good, though. I have sorta plateau'd, and the Bibles are very compelling. At the same time, to actually hit all the primary goals (for instance) for all twenty-five problems seems like it would slow me down too much. What do you do?
Former mostly-anonymous admissions cycle blogger. Current law student.

#### Harper

• Sr. Citizen
• Posts: 225
• works every time
##### Re: Logic Games/Logical Reasoning Bibles: Are you a Strict Constructionist?
« Reply #1 on: April 27, 2006, 09:07:11 AM »
I'm an LG disciple, and I had the same problem at first - for example, when the hell are you supposed to use "Identify the Possibilities/Templates"?  One thing that really helped me to grasp how to apply the LG rules was, not surprisingly, the Ultimate Set-ups Guide.  I check that after every practice games section I do (all tests from 94 to 04, or something like that), and that helped me realize when I should do what.  You start to see in what situations the "Identify the..." method works best - especially in advanced linear games when you have a chunk of variables that always have to go together.  I'm still working on it, but it's amazing how much easier those questions become when you can see all the possibilities right in front of you.

#### Eugene Young

• Sr. Citizen
• Posts: 538
##### Re: Logic Games/Logical Reasoning Bibles: Are you a Strict Constructionist?
« Reply #2 on: April 27, 2006, 10:05:22 AM »
I wouldn't call myself an LGB disciple, but I've found that reviewing the the Ultimate Set ups Guide after a games section to be a huge help as well. Even if I get the answers, it helps to see things the way they do, so you can apply it the next time you see a similar problem.

#### Electric Counterpoint

• Sr. Citizen
• Posts: 441
• Harvard 2010
##### Re: Logic Games/Logical Reasoning Bibles: Are you a Strict Constructionist?
« Reply #3 on: April 28, 2006, 03:46:19 PM »
Just a bump -- I was hoping this would take off as I start seriously going over my old tests.
Former mostly-anonymous admissions cycle blogger. Current law student.

#### dusya4

• Sr. Citizen
• Posts: 894
##### Re: Logic Games/Logical Reasoning Bibles: Are you a Strict Constructionist?
« Reply #4 on: April 28, 2006, 05:33:28 PM »
I didn't do the LGB, I used the Kaplan book, I'm not sure that the book itself helped me (maybe a little bit on the diagramming side) I think it was more the fact that I did about 100 grames and redid the ones I got wrong after a sufficient amount of time. Learning various techniques isn't going to help if you don't practice them. But they should become pretty natural after a while. I don't even think about what type of game it is, nor could I remember the different types at this point. At first I struggled a little bit with the best way to set up a game (if it wasn't a sequencing one). I would set it up and start working through the questions only to realize that my setup didn't yield easily to solving the game, so I would try a different set-up. So that's how I used the book.

For LR I did use the LRB. The biggest thing I took away from it are the conditional reasoning, formal logic, and making sure that I identify the conclusion and the premises. And the diagramming techniques helped too. My suggestion is that you track the types of questions that you have the most trouble with and go back over those sections in the LRB in more detail.
All you need is ignorance and confidence; then success is sure.
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/display.php?user=XYHA4