Law School Discussion

....

Re: MASTER LR LIST- 38 TO GO!
« Reply #30 on: June 12, 2006, 06:43:45 PM »
argh, that was confusing.  i put that problem-solving or whatever requires intelligence.  but that's probably wrong.  the reason i didn't pick either of the two with both intelligence and consciousness was that one just seemed to be restating the conclusion (consciousness doesn't imply intelligence) and the other was the opposite of the conclusion (i.e. intelligence implies consciousness).  geez, maybe i didn't do that well on this exam after all...

edit: this one was not experimental.  i had two LGs.

Re: MASTER LR LIST- 40 TO GO!
« Reply #31 on: June 12, 2006, 06:44:48 PM »
what were the answers to the last two questions on the hard LR?

FossilJ

  • *****
  • 11330
  • Carbon-date THIS, biznitch!
    • View Profile
    • Cricket Rules!
    • Email
Re: MASTER LR LIST- 40 TO GO!
« Reply #32 on: June 12, 2006, 06:44:55 PM »
No, what I meant to say is, there was only one answer that connected consciousness and intelligence properly.  I can't remember which answer it was.  I'm too vague on the details.

Re: MASTER LR LIST- 39 TO GO!
« Reply #33 on: June 12, 2006, 06:59:50 PM »
Did anyone have a LR question about some woman who has to disclose her finances if she meets some two-part condition (like she has to either be on the board of some company as well as something else)?  I'm pretty sure that this was #25 of a 26 question section.  I think the answer had something to do with the fact that even though she doesn't meet the condition, she might have to disclose her finances anyway for some other reason.

Also, those of you who had either Logic Games or RC experimental sections--did you have the question I'm describing?  This section was insanely difficult, easily the hardest LR section I've ever done, so I would be thrilled to hear that it was actually just experimental.

Rockie

  • ****
  • 453
  • Scream for me LSD!
    • View Profile
Re: MASTER LR LIST- 39 TO GO!
« Reply #34 on: June 12, 2006, 07:01:45 PM »
Did anyone have a LR question about some woman who has to disclose her finances if she meets some two-part condition (like she has to either be on the board of some company as well as something else)?  I'm pretty sure that this was #25 of a 26 question section.  I think the answer had something to do with the fact that even though she doesn't meet the condition, she might have to disclose her finances anyway for some other reason.

Also, those of you who had either Logic Games or RC experimental sections--did you have the question I'm describing?  This section was insanely difficult, easily the hardest LR section I've ever done, so I would be thrilled to hear that it was actually just experimental.

I have no idea which section it was in but I remember that one and it was def. that she might have to disclose for another reason (or assuming the stated criteria are the only reasons she'd have to disclose or whatever). I thought that was an easy one, especially considering the endless series of tricky ones we've been arguing over.

Re: MASTER LR LIST- 38 TO GO!
« Reply #35 on: June 12, 2006, 07:02:08 PM »
sorry, i had that question and an lg experimental.  i got the same answer as you though.  opening my store is going to kill me...ugh.

Re: MASTER LR LIST- 39 TO GO!
« Reply #36 on: June 12, 2006, 07:03:41 PM »
Did anyone have a LR question about some woman who has to disclose her finances if she meets some two-part condition (like she has to either be on the board of some company as well as something else)?  I'm pretty sure that this was #25 of a 26 question section.  I think the answer had something to do with the fact that even though she doesn't meet the condition, she might have to disclose her finances anyway for some other reason.

I had this one.  *moves closer to the fax machine*  I'm not sure what I chose, do you remember any more of it?  It seemed like she didn't meet EITHER of the conditions set

Rockie

  • ****
  • 453
  • Scream for me LSD!
    • View Profile
Re: MASTER LR LIST- 39 TO GO!
« Reply #37 on: June 12, 2006, 07:05:24 PM »
Did anyone have a LR question about some woman who has to disclose her finances if she meets some two-part condition (like she has to either be on the board of some company as well as something else)?  I'm pretty sure that this was #25 of a 26 question section.  I think the answer had something to do with the fact that even though she doesn't meet the condition, she might have to disclose her finances anyway for some other reason.

I had this one.  *moves closer to the fax machine*  I'm not sure what I chose, do you remember any more of it?  It seemed like she didn't meet EITHER of the conditions set

She didn't but the idea was there could be OTHER reasons she'd have to disclose. If A or B she has to disclose. But what if C would force her to disclose (even if it was unstated). It didnt say A and B were the ONLY reasons.

Schruted

  • ****
  • 747
  • I love her.
    • View Profile
Re: MASTER LR LIST- 39 TO GO!
« Reply #38 on: June 12, 2006, 07:05:37 PM »
Did anyone have a LR question about some woman who has to disclose her finances if she meets some two-part condition (like she has to either be on the board of some company as well as something else)?  I'm pretty sure that this was #25 of a 26 question section.  I think the answer had something to do with the fact that even though she doesn't meet the condition, she might have to disclose her finances anyway for some other reason.

Also, those of you who had either Logic Games or RC experimental sections--did you have the question I'm describing?  This section was insanely difficult, easily the hardest LR section I've ever done, so I would be thrilled to hear that it was actually just experimental.

It was one of the hardest LR sections I've ever done, too. I didn't even get to that question. I just hope the answer the last few questions is D.

Schruted

  • ****
  • 747
  • I love her.
    • View Profile
Re: MASTER LR LIST- 39 TO GO!
« Reply #39 on: June 12, 2006, 07:07:32 PM »
And another parallel reasoning question where I picked A) which was about children having learning difficulties because of hearing problems or something like that. Anyone remember that one?

I'm not sure if we're thinking of the same question, but I narrowed it down to 2 answers, and the one that said "... merely coincidental" was wrong in my opinion, because the question gave an explanation for the coincidence.