Taking a prep-course, getting hit hard on practice q's.

User avatar
Posts: 83
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 7:15 am

Taking a prep-course, getting hit hard on practice q's.

Postby californihuh » Wed Oct 26, 2011 11:14 pm

I don't know what most people on average struggle w/ the LSAT, but for me, it seems to be with the LR. (Based on the first PT alone)

While I'm going through the prep-course book, and whether it be the actual diagramming part or simply answering the questions, I can't get these right at all. I keep screwing up somewhere, (IE: I diagram something that doesn't need to be diagramed, or diagram a part of a sentence in conjunction with a portion that doesn't need to be diagrammed, etc). At times, I make silly acronyms that are nowhere to be found on the explanation; yes, they were in the stimulus, but they had nothing to do with the final diagrams and were probably inserted as bait... Which I fell for.

After reading through the explanations and watching the videos, I go, "Oh. I get it now." or "Yeah... I can see that." And it makes sense. Of course, I go back and look at the explanation of why an answer is a certain way, and why the rest of the answers are CBF (if the question is a MBT question), but it still doesn't defeat the fact that I got them wrong. Actual test-day will show no mercy.

Was everyone on the same boat when initially going through a prep-course? It's highly discouraging to go through the textbook getting marked on every practice question after each subsequent lesson. Granted I'm only on the 2nd chapter, getting through Logical Force of LR, but still I feel like I am behind on so many levels.

Here's an example of just one of the many issues I've been having (I'm linking this because I don't want to do anything illegal by copy&pasting): http://www.lawschooldiscussion.org/index.php?topic=39163.0

The diagraming should be 3 premises:
T--> MR
LR--> T
RE--> MR & NA (contrapositive of this would be, -MR or -NA --> -RE)

Now, the answer choice is "A: A friendship supported solely by trust and mutual respect will not be long-lasting." Ok, cool. but the answer explanation explains that because NA is missing from the contrapositive (-MR or -NA --> -RE), the relationship will not be long-lasting. So answer "A" is correct.

Wait, what the hell? What does "not be long-lasting" in the answer choice have ANYTHING to do with "not relationship enduring" (-RE) from the contrapositive? Long-lasting relationships were already diagramed as "LR". Are we simply replacing "LR" with "RE"? I know they IMPLY the same thing, but I thought we were NEVER TO ASSUME things?

To me, the answer choice (A) looks like: T & MR --> -LR. (Trust and Mutual Respect will not lead to a long-lasting relationship)

Based on this passage, I also initially made a diagram that involved personal and professional, and also marriages.... Factors that had absolutely nothing to do with the actual answer. And note, in the last sentence, it says that in order to achieve an Enduring Personal Relationship, you must have both Mutual Respect and Affinity... Huh? Affinity? Is that the same thing as NATURAL AFFINITY from the previous sentence? Are we just supposed to ASSUME that "Affinity" is the same thing as "Natural Affinity? Is there no such thing as 10% affinity? Irregular affinity?

ugh. I'm getting a headache.

User avatar
Posts: 943
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 3:09 am

Re: Taking a prep-course, getting hit hard on practice q's.

Postby noleknight16 » Wed Oct 26, 2011 11:41 pm

This is an inference question.

Despite the fact they made subtle change in the wording of A, the overall meaning is the same and can be proven based on the information above. We know that a friendship that only has trust and mutual respect will not last long because it is missing affinity (a requirement to have a personal relationship "endure")

Correct inference answers do not require word for word equivalents with the information above. If you still are irked by the rewording, the best strategy for inference questions is to eliminate your way to the correct answer. B through E are clearly wrong, leaving A, which should put your fears to rest.

I think you got caught up too much in drawing the conditional reasoning and having it match exactly.

I hope this helps.

User avatar
Tiago Splitter
Posts: 15188
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:20 am

Re: Taking a prep-course, getting hit hard on practice q's.

Postby Tiago Splitter » Wed Oct 26, 2011 11:54 pm

Prep courses will teach you a lot of tricks that take time to put into practice. As time goes on you'll find that you don't need to diagram most of the LR questions, and you'll figure out when diagramming can really help.

User avatar
Posts: 83
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 7:15 am

Re: Taking a prep-course, getting hit hard on practice q's.

Postby californihuh » Thu Oct 27, 2011 5:19 am

noleknight16 wrote:I hope this helps.

It does. Thanks for advice. It just feels shallow when I'm trying to eliminate all the wrong answers to find the right question. Only to find out that I don't understand why the right answer choice is right. Thanks. I have a new strategy of approach now.

Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BobBoblaw, cherrygalore, dj9i27, Vino.Veritas, Yahoo [Bot] and 4 guests