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 - nu07

Pages: [1]
1
Studying for the LSAT / Re: This question/answer makes no sense
« on: June 29, 2006, 02:41:11 PM »
Nevermind, I'm reading this goddamned answer sheet wrong.  It says Section 3 on my desktop but I think it's actually Section 4.

so wait, what was the correct answer? was the computer one that you put incorrect?

2
hate to break it to you, but it's basically conclusive that A is the correct response, and C was just a clever trap.  the trick to answering the question is realizing that the critical assumption in the stimulus is actually made in the first two sentences, and all that later stuff in the stimulus (about truthfulness and realism etc) is actually superfluous.  for your convenience, here is the answer as i spelled it out in the "eureka!" thread on the topic:

Okay guys, the minority answer choice is correct.  The question went like this:

There is a difference between beauty and truth. 
After all if there were no difference, then the most realistic pieces of art would be the best as well.
Since most real pieces are the most truthful
but many of the most real are not actually the best.  Or something REALLY REALLY CLOSE TO THIS.

Therefore, to make the assumption that only the MOST beautiful are the best is irrelevant. 

The answer must be A, because without the assumption that the most beautiful art is the best art, how do you get from this claim:

"there is a difference between beauty and truth"

to this deduction:

"After all if there were no difference, then the most realistic pieces of art would be the best as well"  ?

Clearly, the speaker in the question is trying to express that if truth=beauty, then the most truthful art is the best.  I don't see how it is at all controversial that this deduction can ONLY be made if we're already presuming that the most beautiful art is the best. 

In other words, let's say that the speaker WASN'T assuming that the most beautiful art is the best art.  How could she take truth=beauty to imply that the most truthful art is the best art? 

edit: to clarify, we can interpret the speaker as saying that if truth=beauty , we can SUBSTITUTE 'truthful' for 'beautiful' in the phrase "the most beautiful is the best art"

3
all I know is anyone who can remember any of these questions with the type of accuracy that you all have should not sweat the LSAT. I can only remember one or two questions that gave me trouble and I have to go with the minority on this one "most beautiful" was definitly in there its why i chose the most beatiful answer choice. I'd picked the beautiful equals best but changed it after I reread and noticed the emphasis on "most" Regardless of one question Im sure you will all do very well.

Did you read the reasoning I wrote a few posts above for why the answer HAS to be A?  If the wording of A DIDN'T put emphasis on "most", then the substitution with truthful for beautiful wouldn't work (the substitution that occurs in the 2nd sentence of the stimulus), and then A would be wrong, and the question would have no correct answers.  unless you're seeing something i'm not...

4
Okay guys, the minority answer choice is correct.  The question went like this:

There is a difference between beauty and truth. 
After all if there were no difference, then the most realistic pieces of art would be the best as well.
Since most real pieces are the most truthful
but many of the most real are not actually the best.  Or something REALLY REALLY CLOSE TO THIS.

Therefore, to make the assumption that only the MOST beautiful are the best is irrelevant. 

The answer must be A, because without the assumption that the most beautiful art is the best art, how do you get from this claim:

"there is a difference between beauty and truth"

to this deduction:

"After all if there were no difference, then the most realistic pieces of art would be the best as well"  ?

Clearly, the speaker in the question is trying to express that if truth=beauty, then the most truthful art is the best.  I don't see how it is at all controversial that this deduction can ONLY be made if we're already presuming that the most beautiful art is the best. 

In other words, let's say that the speaker WASN'T assuming that the most beautiful art is the best art.  How could she take truth=beauty to imply that the most truthful art is the best art? 

edit: to clarify, we can interpret the speaker as saying that if truth=beauty , we can SUBSTITUTE 'truthful' for 'beautiful' in the phrase "the most beautiful is the best art"

5
Studying for the LSAT / Re: MASTER LR LIST- 38 TO GO!
« on: June 12, 2006, 07:12:39 PM »

YES!  I dont' recognize any of these three either.  It might be helpful if ppl who do recognize them could tell us if they had 3 LR sections.

I didn't have the family/police one but i did have the dinosaur one and the computer/tv one.  i had 3 LR sections so the family/police one must have been exp., and there must have been more than one exp. LR section circulating

6
Studying for the LSAT / Re: Let the June 06 Post Mortem Begin
« on: June 12, 2006, 06:56:12 PM »
Lets hear some agreement or disagreement on the somber writer point at issue question- so far the answer is they diagree about whether a writer who writes somber stuff can be a good one



This one is coming back to me... can anybody elaborate?

The two people talking about "Caverton" or something and how he's a good writer, first guy says he's too somber and pessimistic.  Second guy says he's good


Wasn't the question about what they agree upon?  Wasn't the answer that the writer is pessimistic?

7
Studying for the LSAT / Re: MASTER LR LIST- 39 TO GO!
« on: June 12, 2006, 06:31:13 PM »
[quote author=Rockbird
No clue, you'd have to jog my memory with question subjects.


Was #26 possibly the one about computers and TVs...like whether computers will replace TVs?  I think I got C, which was something about most people with computers already having TVs. Ring a bell?  Or was this not 26?

8
Studying for the LSAT / Re: MASTER LR LIST- 39 TO GO!
« on: June 12, 2006, 06:09:52 PM »
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.

Yeah actually this particular question wasn't too hard, it's just the only one I remember from a brutal section.  The one before it (#24), it was a "which of the following has the same reasoning pattern"...do you remember if by chance you put "E"?  Also, for the one after it (#26), I have no memory whatsoever of the question, but do you remember what you got?  Was it "C"?

9
Studying for the LSAT / Re: MASTER LR LIST- 39 TO GO!
« on: June 12, 2006, 05:59:50 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.

Pages: [1]