Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Q.E.D
About
- Username
- Q.E.D
- Joined
- Visits
- 1,245
- Last Active
- Roles
- Member
Comments
-
Comment deleted, too long-winded
-
Trolling test-takers for a living sounds fun. I do over-complicate things, though, as some ppl here would agree. But I realize I'm an insignificant windbag. Admitting it makes it all okay, obviously.
-
I think "left out of the argument" I can agree with on some level. I still think an assumption can be stated in the discussion though, since the key to assumption-hood for a proposition is how it's viewed. Of courses, what matters for the LSAT is a …
-
Hi @lizmiss24. The LSAT seems to have tons of questions aimed directly at the fallacy of composition. That's a term for either a) concluding that what's true of a group is true of the members of that group or b) concluding that what's true of the me…
-
Interesting. You're positive the NA isn't actually necessary? I'm curious about these examples. I didn't look closely at it, but PT 71.S1.Q11 seems to be about pollution. Is that the right reference? PT means PrepTest, right?
-
I would differ with you about that, but it would be a petty difference.
-
Oh yes, it seems quite right that the assumptions you're asked about won't be stated. Thanks @jaredj229
-
It might help to think about a claim as an act, namely the act of assertion. If I claim that your cat is on the blue mat, I'm actively telling you, the audience, that the proposition 'your cat is on the blue mat' is true, and I'm deliberately tryi…
-
I don't think OP's suggestion is so easily dismissed. I've come across many managers, directors, VPs, executives and entrepreneurs with JDs. A legal background is also particularly handy at the executive level, where you're constantly negotiating co…
-
Those links are handy. Thanks.
-
I gotta drop a plug for predicate logic here. I find it highly appropriate in this case because it captures the recursive application of Smith's claim to Smith's knowledge of her own claim. ∀x∀y(xMy-->xCy) Anyone x knows anyone y's meaning (M) …
-
It should be Independent --> (/TF or EB); therefore, (Independent and TF) --> EB. No independent store could sell TF and /EB. You could conclude /TF--> EB if it said the stores sell one or both of TF and EB. You have to watch for instances…
-
Hey @runiggyrun, thanks for the response. I agree with you about the correct answer choice. It's clear they want us to choose that. I'm just saying that neither the answer nor the inference in the stim follows from what they give. And we can easily …
-
Hello and good day to you. I'm new here, so def take what I say with a grain of salt, but it sounds like you need to work on these items: 1. Identifying the relevant info 2. Evaluating that info There are many possible reasons you're struggling …
-
Either I'm a fool or they messed up this question. I posted a counter-example to it recently, but I think the moderators took it down because I linked a spreadsheet in my Google Drive. West Male: 38 Adult (38%), 17 Young, 55 Total Female: 29 Adul…
-
That's it... Bertrand Russell's new nickname is "The Fog"... meh, guess I had that coming Anyway, props for being able to identify Russell.
-
bold on (i) fail, life goes on
-
meh, I talk too much I want to clarify my meaning in “follow the negation”: When the ‘not’ crosses the quantifier, the quantifier changes. Observe: (i) Not…some… (ii) --------> Not pulling that ‘not’ over to this side (iii) …
-
That's uncommon text manipulation for a student. Excel is strong with this one. He/she may someday become a jedi knight.
-
Gotta follow the negation or else it doesn't make any sense. 'ALL ravens are black.' = 'NOT SOME (not any) ravens are NOT black.' 'NOT ALL ravens are black.' = 'NOT NOT SOME (or just some) ravens are NOT black.' 'SOME ravens are black.' = 'NOT ALL…
-
@Pacifico I think I come off pretentious. It's a character flaw. I'm working on it. Like I keep saying, 7sage is wonderful and I'm so thankful for the good advice available for free in this community.
-
@Pacifico Hey man, nice to meet you. Your comment is duly noted. What would you suggest? I'll grab one for the coffee table.
-
Hi Dillon. Nice to meet you, and thanks. 7sage is a wonderful thing. Wouldn't want to cross the people behind the service.
-
Just eating dinner and poking around the forum. 'Guess I'll run my digital mouth. Why not? I've been reading dense material for my whole adult life (age 30), so RC is one of my strengths. Absorbing linguistic meaning off the page is rapid and insti…
-
Hi 7Sage. You are amazing. Thanks for everything. That said, I have some concern about rule 12. My gf is preparing for the LSAT and I've been helping her prep. I'm going to take it with her for fun. I'm doing a little prep myself and have already b…
-
Hello folks. I'm new. First, let me say this site is amazing. About the outside reading, I gotta recommend Peter Brown's Rise of Western Christendom. It's a fascinating and seminal piece of scholarship surveying the first several centuries of Christ…