Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
dcdcdcdcdc
About
- Username
- dcdcdcdcdc
- Joined
- Visits
- 716
- Last Active
- Roles
- Member
Comments
-
Thank you so much for taking the time to respond so thoroughly @"J.Y. Ping" and @"Jonathon Wang" A few things I want to clarify from my original post. First of all, I am grateful for all the work that 7Sage has put into this curriculum and I coul…
-
Jonathon: I know the group 3 and group 4 indicators by heart. I also know to use my above suggestion when I see the very common structure of Group 4 X Group 3 Y I would assert that there is a difference between knowing the word and being able to ap…
-
Looks like it might be time for a study break...
-
Came here looking for this post. Thanks so much for the above comments. Ran into this translation on page 257 of The LSAT Trainer by Mike Kim. He has it translated as if the indicator was for sufficiency rather than necessity, but has "only" listed …
-
Thanks! Just checking in on the LSAT-specific reason this article its usefulness. I appreciate the real-world utility of the article. Would you say that the language and writing style employed in the article are most helpful for LSAT reading compre…
-
Thanks guys. I am filing "action" under the same category as words like should, could, will, might, likely and can as requiring a little extra attention in the stimulus. I was making some great headway with eliminating answer choices that reasoned f…
-
Thanks! Half of my response is a means of explaining my reasons to myself and the other half is hoping others may find it useful. I see now that my initial reason for eliminating C was incorrect and that instead of failing the sufficient condition, …
-
Thanks for the quick reply. The sufficient condition and then the necessary condition you mentioned is as follows: IF people know the consequences of an action they voluntarily undertake THEN they are responsible for those consequences. I understa…
-
Thanks. I'm reviewing the MBT section before heading into the second MBT section on the curriculum so wanted to be sure if it would bear some fruit to brush up on those.
-
I am skeptical as to whether "always" is really a logical indicator, at least for Group 2 necessary conditions. Grammatically, English usage has the adverb "always" following the verb "to BE" and generally coming directly before any other verb. It i…
-
Ahh ok, at 7:10 into the video explanation of that strengthen question JY mirrors the lesson on the in-out games and it clicked. E is giving us A, but the argument is giving us not A, so rule irrelevant, hence E is wrong. Is it problematic at all …
-
@runiggyrun said: the stimulus doesn't give you B. It gives you A. Isn't B the conclusion of the stimulus? So, the stimulus is giving us both A and B, but the difference is A is supplied as a premise? ----- Either way, I've now diagrammed the …
-
Thanks! I'll work on that lesson now and see what comes of it.
-
@dcdcdcdcdc said: the likelihood of committing the mistake and the likelihood of committing the crime are separate and distinct from each other. ^ the above is why I highlighted the difference between committing the mistake and committing the crim…
-
Thanks Q.E.D. Your earlier comments on a similar thread were helpful in cracking this for myself, particularly the statement "NOT NOT some ravens are NOT black" https://classic.7sage.com/discussion#/discussion/comment/33079