The value of PT 63 RC

timeless
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 12:07 am

The value of PT 63 RC

Postby timeless » Tue Nov 29, 2011 5:51 am

It makes even the most infamous of the modern passages (Noguchi, Kin, Riddle Basin, etc) look so tamable in comparison.

Had I used this for my RC drills in the beginning, RC would have become my favorite section.

It had like the worst possible layout: very dense first passage, literature (my least favorite), and under-the-sea passage...A,B passage was okay...

Anyways that under-the-sea/magma crap was a great discourager for those who read actively. If you read it you'll know what I mean. In the first paragraph, the author tells you a f***'in reason, so you would normally expect him to elaborate on that, but he went on a definition marathon. It was basically like, "Law schools are hard to get into, WHY? the FIRST reason is b/c of LSATS (here, you would expect me to tell you the second reason but instead...). What is LSATs? its a logic exam. What is logic? its a branch of philosophy. What is philosophy??" SHIT how illogical can you get on a logic exam?

anyways just sharin my thoughts

User avatar
swtlilsoni
Posts: 399
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 1:00 am

Re: The value of PT 63 RC

Postby swtlilsoni » Wed Nov 30, 2011 10:32 pm

timeless wrote:It makes even the most infamous of the modern passages (Noguchi, Kin, Riddle Basin, etc) look so tamable in comparison.

Had I used this for my RC drills in the beginning, RC would have become my favorite section.

It had like the worst possible layout: very dense first passage, literature (my least favorite), and under-the-sea passage...A,B passage was okay...

Anyways that under-the-sea/magma crap was a great discourager for those who read actively. If you read it you'll know what I mean. In the first paragraph, the author tells you a f***'in reason, so you would normally expect him to elaborate on that, but he went on a definition marathon. It was basically like, "Law schools are hard to get into, WHY? the FIRST reason is b/c of LSATS (here, you would expect me to tell you the second reason but instead...). What is LSATs? its a logic exam. What is logic? its a branch of philosophy. What is philosophy??" SHIT how illogical can you get on a logic exam?

anyways just sharin my thoughts


lol! I am buying PT 63 just because of this.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: kindofcanuck, MSNbot Media, qemini1594 and 2 guests