609d wrote:Ah, to get back from the bars and see this open on my computer...
Anyway, I'm not sure what to say to the complaints. I don't particularly care about the various allegations, though I'm more than happy to send you screenshots of the pages of the LG section of my book if you think that'd be helpful. There's not that much in the way of work beyond a handful of scribbles--as people have intimated, most of it was done in my head. I was -2 total on LG (both, frankly, from dumb errors), if that matters.
Also, if only because debates are fun, let's see if I can't add a little bit of MECE (google it) consultant structure to this whole issue. Presumably, any differences in LSAT score have to come from one of three areas:
--Innate ability: This would be things like working memory or IQ. The former in particular seems to be relevant if we're talking about the difficulty holding all the LG information in your head at once. Either way, the point is that not everyone is the same. If you lock 1000 babies in a room from birth, they won't all score the same on the LSAT. It is to some degree (far from 100%) correlated with various heretic factors.
--"Preparation" prior to viewing the LSAT: This would be everything from doing logic puzzles as a kid to having lawyers as parents and discussing things in terms similar to the LR section at the dinner table every night. In other words, the kinds of things that "train" one to think in the way that the LSAT tests.
--LSAT Preparation: Should be pretty obvious
I'd imagine that the effects of 1+2 are going to equal your diagnostic score, and, of course, the effects of all three are going to result in your final LSAT score (likely with some randomness thrown in). The real value, then, is in figuring out what aspects of 1) and 2) cause certain people to score better initially than others, and how best to mimic those effects in LSAT prep training. And I (and it feels like others) are more than happy to contribute there where possible. It doesn't seem to be particularly useful to anybody to debate whether someone truly took the LSAT "cold" or not.
But, hey, whatever helps you sleep at night.
Indeed. I was arguing about the "Preparation" point of view as I believe it to be the most influential in effecting a cold diagnostic score.
From my readings here on TLS (Which I believe to already be a better than average LSAT test taker's sample of participants) no one goes in cold and is able to ace LG in a manner in which you say you did. Which led me to ask what about your past made you able to do such things, or why are you lieing?
But as I questioned you in this thread, more than enough others have said they were able to reproduce the same scenario as you had.
So I doubt you are all lieing, and since enough of you were able to do such a task, asking about the scenario that made you different from all these other test takers is no longer my right, and likewise doesn't interest me as much as it did at my initial posting upon this topic.
knowing what MECE is(after googling, lol) would definitely lead one to believe that whatever taught you to know of that principle/idea/specific term probably aided you in your ability to conquer LG as most of us would determine from a "cold" LSAT