The Matheatician and the LSAT

bfarag
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2007 1:20 pm

The Matheatician and the LSAT

Postby bfarag » Thu Nov 11, 2010 8:11 pm

I just finished talking to a girl who got a 173 on her LSAT and majored in math. I'm not much of a mathematician... Will that prove detrimental to my 170+ ambitions?

Gaaaaaaah I'm so worked up about this...

User avatar
glitter178
Posts: 771
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 8:21 pm

Re: The Matheatician and the LSAT

Postby glitter178 » Thu Nov 11, 2010 8:14 pm

bfarag wrote:I just finished talking to a girl who got a 173 on her LSAT and majored in math. I'm not much of a mathematician... Will that prove detrimental to my 170+ ambitions?

Gaaaaaaah I'm so worked up about this...


there are plenty of non-math majors who have scored well on the LSAT... i'd suggest taking a practice test and seeing how you do before you start thinking about any correlations between UG major and lsat score.

User avatar
theavrock
Posts: 601
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 10:52 pm

Re: The Matheatician and the LSAT

Postby theavrock » Thu Nov 11, 2010 8:21 pm

IB the picture of the LOL WUT pear

2011Law
Posts: 822
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 3:40 pm

Re: The Matheatician and the LSAT

Postby 2011Law » Thu Nov 11, 2010 8:30 pm

Sarah is both a mathematician and a high LSAT scorer. Matt is not a mathematician. Therefore, Matt will also not be a high LSAT scorer.

Which one of the following arguments uses flawed reasoning most similar to the reasoning above?



EDIT: Either this is a flame or OP is definitely not 170+ material, or both.

EDIT v2.0: OP, you spelled mathematician wrong. You will definitely not get a 170+.

bfarag
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2007 1:20 pm

Re: The Matheatician and the LSAT

Postby bfarag » Thu Nov 11, 2010 8:38 pm

2011Law wrote:Sarah is both a mathematician and a high LSAT scorer. Matt is not a mathematician. Therefore, Matt will also not be a high LSAT scorer.

Which one of the following arguments uses flawed reasoning most similar to the reasoning above?



EDIT: Either this is a flame or OP is definitely not 170+ material, or both.


I wasn't trying to say that. But, sure. I was more concerned that being weak in math would put me at a disadvantage in the types of thinking needed. Sorry for not being specific. Also, I'm just panicking and not thinking clearly because of the three tests I have tomorrow.

I like the off the cuff put down though--it adds a nice touch.

Edit: Thanks, jerk.

Edit v2.0: I'm not sure how I misspelled the word. Does that mean you'll do poorly?

bfarag
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2007 1:20 pm

Re: The Matheatician and the LSAT

Postby bfarag » Thu Nov 11, 2010 8:51 pm

A mod should just delete this. This is kind of pathetic...

User avatar
Kabuo
Posts: 1114
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 8:53 am

Re: The Matheatician and the LSAT

Postby Kabuo » Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:03 pm

bfarag wrote:A mod should just delete this. This is kind of pathetic...


Is this self deprecation?

turkfish
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 1:01 am

Re: The Matheatician and the LSAT

Postby turkfish » Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:14 pm

there are likely other, far more important reasons that may make it difficult for you to obtain a 170+ on the LSAT

2011Law
Posts: 822
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 3:40 pm

Re: The Matheatician and the LSAT

Postby 2011Law » Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:21 pm

bfarag wrote:I'm not sure how I misspelled the word. Does that mean you'll do poorly?


No, it means you will.

EDIT: EDIT v2.0 was a joke in itself. I am not surprised you did not get it.

User avatar
ShuckingNotJiving
Posts: 266
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 11:24 am

Re: The Matheatician and the LSAT

Postby ShuckingNotJiving » Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:25 pm

well, you definitely won't score 170+ if you spend the time you're supposed to be studying arguing with people on here.

also, i would suggest reviewing causation vs. correlation. it's shows up on plenty of questions in the lsat and you seem to be confusing the two.

2011Law
Posts: 822
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 3:40 pm

Re: The Matheatician and the LSAT

Postby 2011Law » Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:36 pm

ShuckingNotJiving wrote:well, you definitely won't score 170+ if you spend the time you're supposed to be studying arguing with people on here.


That's not true at all. I know someone who spent all his time arguing with strangers on this site and he got a 180. If he can do it, then OP can do it.

User avatar
ShuckingNotJiving
Posts: 266
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 11:24 am

Re: The Matheatician and the LSAT

Postby ShuckingNotJiving » Thu Nov 11, 2010 10:00 pm

2011Law wrote:
ShuckingNotJiving wrote:well, you definitely won't score 170+ if you spend the time you're supposed to be studying arguing with people on here.


That's not true at all. I know someone who spent all his time arguing with strangers on this site and he got a 180. If he can do it, then OP can do it.



as a matter of fact, since your friend argued with people on this site and got a 180, then clearly that's the only way once can do so. op, now you know what you gotta do.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: cianchetta0, dontsaywhatyoumean, Evelyn2016, Yahoo [Bot] and 6 guests