Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Accounts Playable
About
- Username
- Accounts Playable
- Joined
- Visits
- 4,927
- Last Active
- Roles
- Sage, ⭐
Comments
-
I took this a few weeks ago, so I'll probably drop by just to listen.
-
Answer to your first question: The games are on two pages, so on the first page, I number my rules and draw a master game board. If I decide to split my game board, I do it on the first page. All "upfront" inferences are on this page, so if I get …
-
@danielznelson You can still purchase recent exams from the LSAC website and amazon.com.
-
@allison.gill.sanford PT 41. Section 4. Passage 1. I think the LSAC was just trolling us all.
-
@Fish0701 I use it to see how long it takes me to do individual LR questions. My goal is 25 questions in 25 minutes, so if I spend 2 minutes on a question without skipping it, I don't get to eat dessert that night.
-
In a LR question, the fact pattern might give you a conditional relationship, and tell you that something isn't the case. This usually signals that you need to negate some stuff in your lawgic chain and see what triggers. In a LG, the rules may gi…
-
Tough weaken question; I had to read the argument a few times before I saw what was going on. When people moved from Asia to America, they saw a ton of animals that would be extinct in 2000 years. It isn't likely that hunting was the reason for th…
-
@mcmlaw36 I think you're confusing the negation and contrapositive. The contrapositive (flip and negate) of (A or --->(C and D) is Not (C and D)---> Not (A or . This simplifies down to: (Not C or Not D)--->(Not A and Not . The original…
-
It translates like this: "(A or ---->(C and D)" One of A or B happening is sufficient to trigger both C and D. Negating the a conditional statement means that you can have the sufficient condition trigger, but the necessary condition not trigge…
-
@Pacifico Haha. I was waiting for someone to mention his; one of my favorites too!
-
The People vs. OJ Simpson is a pretty good show as well. Watching the the prosecution completely screw up jury selection is infuriating. Also, Intelligence Squared debates on Youtube are great to watch. Lots of interesting topics that are made ea…
-
Yes. All of the other videos and stuff and working fine; it's just this one video on this one exam. Must be haunted or something.
-
@brna0714 I think the GRE is a far easier exam. I think the main reason law schools like U of A are using the GRE is to entice more applicants to apply there, which would presumably boost application fee revenue. You might have a person take the…
-
Hmm, interesting. I cleared my cache and the video still won't play. Only video so far I've had an issue with. Weird. No big deal though.
-
@brna0714 1.) Article about the predictive power of the LSAT: http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2015/07/13/new-study-tries-to-predict-law-school-grades/ The LSAT does correlate slightly with first year grades (which I didn't know), but the value put on th…
-
@UsernameChange I completely disagree. In my opinion, the LSAT would be greatly improved with a math section, and it doesn't necessarily need to be exactly like the one found on the GRE. Logic is applied mathematics, and the games section would …
-
@MrSamIam Or, more importantly, we have to stop Nicolas Cage from making more movies. Think of the children!
-
Haha, I love that website. This article is another favorite of mine: http://gizmodo.com/5977989/internet-explorer-vs-murder-rate-will-be-your-favorite-chart-today
-
Tough question, and I do think answer D is a necessary assumption due to the strength of the conclusion: the findings of the craters MUST be explained by the lower rates of geophysical processes. No other reason can account for the abundance of cra…
-
@Elle2015 Thanks for the response! I see what you're saying about B, but the fact pattern begins by saying that the dinosaurs became "suddenly extinct," and the angiosperm theory attempts to explain how the dinosaurs became suddenly extinct. But d…
-
I just took this exam this morning, so I might sit in on this and listen.
-
@"The 180 Bro_OVO" I might have gotten booted again. Is the call over?
-
@"The 180 Bro_OVO" I'm still here! Can you guys not here me?
-
This is a pretty strange question, and the LSAT doesn't have many questions presented as a dialogue. We have to find the flaw in the lawyer's argument. The lawyer is asking some questions about a project. Specifically, the questions seem to be ab…
-
I'll try to attend Saturday's. I just retook PT 44 this morning; can't hurt to listen in.
-
Some like to bubble after every page of questions (i.e. say one page of LR has 3 questions, do those questions, and then bubble those 3 in). It gives your mind a few seconds rest between sets of questions. I don't do that since I tend to end up fo…
-
1.) Yes. A "pre-phase" is what you anticipate the answer to be before you read the answer choices. It is useful to do at least 99% of the time because it solidifies the argument in your brain, and it makes eliminating wrong answer choices easier t…
-
This is a pretty tricky question since the correct answer is so abstractly worded, and I relied on POE to get to this one. Premise 1: If you don't eat fatty foods, you increase your chances of not having a heart attack. Premise 2: If you don't ea…
-
There are two ways I approach these questions. First, by active reading, I can usually upfront know what was mentioned in both passages. I try to circle the common term in one passage and then draw a line/arrow to that same term on phrase in the o…
-
@nye8870 Same. I just finished the 3rd episode. Unfortunately, it's not that uncommon for bullshit like this to happen. When I audited prisons over a summer, I heard stories like this all the time from either the inmates themselves or from viewi…