Questions for "Naturals"

blsingindisguise
Posts: 1296
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 1:08 am

Re: Questions for "Naturals"

Postby blsingindisguise » Mon Jul 29, 2013 2:49 pm

Graeme (Hacking the LSAT) wrote:I used to be a pedantic nerd, obsessed with logical correctness. Which meant that I could see why any statement might not be true. This is a useful skill for LR.

I've lost the pedantism, but kept the skill for seeing how a statement might be false. That's a useful skill to cultivate, as long as you remember it's inapplicable to ordinary conversation (but very useful for business/life planning).


This was me too. I wouldn't accept any generalization or any logical fallacy in a statement. Probably drove people close to me crazy. But yeah, being that kind of a jerk is what you need to do on the LSAT.

SmokeyG
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 5:27 pm

Re: Questions for "Naturals"

Postby SmokeyG » Mon Jul 29, 2013 7:10 pm

.
Last edited by SmokeyG on Thu Mar 06, 2014 11:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

92653
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2013 11:36 pm

Re: Questions for "Naturals"

Postby 92653 » Mon Jul 29, 2013 11:10 pm

So I got a 176 after three weeks' study. I'm kind of a good test taker (got a 2400 on the SAT, but put far more effort into it) and didn't have much time to focus before the June test. I read - a lot - New York Times as well as fiction and nonfiction, so RC was easy for me. I found Logic Games incredibly tough until I just kept doing it over and over again (I usually wasn't able to finish in time), because I feel that's more of a spatial/mathematical skill set that I have less of. It's weird, but with LR I would tend to just know the answer.
I come from a very educated family and reading has been a thing for us as long as I can remember. Also, the Bibles were super useful, as well as doing SO many PTs.

(Basically, I think the moral of the story is, read the Times :p)

jmjm
Posts: 329
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 1:59 am

Re: Questions for "Naturals"

Postby jmjm » Wed Jul 31, 2013 5:30 pm

lawschool2014hopeful wrote:Thanks for all of the responses so far,

A follow up question is then, do you ever doubt your answer? If so how do you deal with it? How much consideration do you give to answers that does not exactly match what you had in mind after reading the question, but prior to the answer choices?

On a somewhat related note, I feel like I have a problem of over-justifying an an attractive, but wrong answer choice, like I feel like I can over-stretch the truth, does anyone have any technique or had experience dealing with this? Do you all just go with an answer in mind prior to A.C and just kind ignore the rest as a strategy? Thats what I feel like the only thing that is slightly working for me at the moment.

Lastly, do you ever explicitly justify all your answer picks? or is like, I kind of feel like this is right and go with it?


Interested in your question as well. I never took lsat but with more than a decade of experience in engineering, I run into a similar issue of overthinking answer choices. Interestingly sometimes it leads to finding genuine issue with lsat questions, esp lr. Mostly though, the case is that some questions that I'd consider unclear or framed ambiguously so other choices could be justified are understood to be correct according to lsat, making those questions a good learning exercise about lsat ways. I am amazed to read on this thread that people exist who could score so high when doing PT the first time.

User avatar
John_rizzy_rawls
Posts: 3477
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 2:44 pm

Re: Questions for "Naturals"

Postby John_rizzy_rawls » Wed Jul 31, 2013 5:48 pm

Policy debate, reading circle jerk philosophy and Econ, scouring random Wikipedia articles until 4am, basketball, swimming, and long walks on the beach.

User avatar
HandToGod
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2013 7:26 pm

Re: Questions for "Naturals"

Postby HandToGod » Wed Jul 31, 2013 6:20 pm

John_rizzy_rawls wrote:Policy debate, reading circle jerk philosophy and Econ, scouring random Wikipedia articles until 4am, basketball, swimming, and long walks on the beach.



I did policy nationally for my last 3 years of high school. Went to two tournaments in college, but it's just not possible to keep grades up, debate research, AND sleep. Anyway, without a doubt having spent my teenage years reading something and reflexively going "where's the internal link?" LR flaws are a breeze.

User avatar
DrStudMuffin
Posts: 236
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 7:54 pm

Re: Questions for "Naturals"

Postby DrStudMuffin » Wed Jul 31, 2013 6:33 pm

.
Last edited by DrStudMuffin on Wed Nov 13, 2013 3:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
manofjustice
Posts: 1323
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 10:01 pm

Re: Questions for "Naturals"

Postby manofjustice » Wed Jul 31, 2013 6:43 pm

I think by far the biggest help for me was studying formal logic in college.

Sentential and predicate calculi.

They're not as scary as they sound. Just learn the basic fallacies and argument forms of each and be able to recognize them in text. No need to practice deriving arguments using the formal symbology.

For both calculi, basic argument forms: modus ponens, modes tollens, disjunctive syllogism, and hypothetical syllogism; basic fallacies: denying the antecedent, confirming the consequent, affirming a disjunct, and the undistributed middle.

Unless these fallacies and argument forms are second-hand to you, in both the sentential (i.e. non-quantificational) and predicate (i.e. quantificational) language, you cannot get a perfect score on the LSAT.

Learn the sentential calculus first, then the predicate calculus. Practice; don't just learn. Everything above is intuitive and learned easily. But it takes practice to stop making mistakes. You'd be surprised how illogical you can really be without realizing it.

LSAT books usually skim all these topics. But I think you're much better off just focusing on these topics separately, drilling on those topics, and then going to the LSAT. I actually find it hard to believe that someone could do poorly on the LSAT (at least on the two logical reasoning sections) if they apply the above fallacies and argument forms well in drills. So, if you want to do well on the LSAT, one way certainly can be to drill baby drill on the above fallacies and argument forms. Get the workbook for a college-level introduction to logic class.

In fact, LSAT questions (at least in the two logical reasoning sections and the logic games section) are just drills that replicate the above argument forms and fallacies, and none other, but obfuscate them with conceptually irrelevant details. So, get back to basics: recognize the fallacies and forms in the first place. Why practice on the obfuscated versions first? That's kind of like...

...learning civil procedure by reading Pennoyer v. Neff.

jmjm
Posts: 329
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 1:59 am

Re: Questions for "Naturals"

Postby jmjm » Mon Aug 11, 2014 11:19 am

bumping for naturals during the last year and this cycle, share how you do well

js1663
Posts: 216
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 2:13 pm

Re: Questions for "Naturals"

Postby js1663 » Mon Aug 11, 2014 11:31 am

.
Last edited by js1663 on Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:33 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
P.J.Fry
Posts: 154
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 7:15 pm

Re: Questions for "Naturals"

Postby P.J.Fry » Mon Aug 11, 2014 12:15 pm

Been studying about a month and getting mostly low 170's now - mostly getting killed by logic games (-5 or worse, and can miss entire games). Was getting low-mid 160's at the start of my studying. I did actually score a 165 seven years ago with minimal study, so the test isn't completely foreign to me.

Efficiently diagramming games setups isn't something that comes natural to me, so I'm definitely going to have to put in some solid work learning to do that. Untimed, I can usually solve them all - it's just learning to think through them quickly.

With RC and LR, I just read the passages, stimuli, and question stems then look at the answers and the correct one is usually just pretty intuitive for me. I've now read the Bibles and Manhattan books, and while I found there to be a few useful tips that will probably save me a point or two, most of their strategies just seem like far too much overthinking. It doesn't help me at all to think about questions in terms of categories or types, nor notating passages and making maps/summaries. Those really just take extra time when I already know what the correct answer is.

Been out of school for over five years now and honestly haven't been doing much academic related. Mostly traveling, working non-mentally stimulating jobs, and having fun. I read the occasional book, but it's usually light, guilty pleasure type fiction.

Guess I'm just lucky.

ETA - Even though I expect to score in the 99th percentile on test day, I feel I would make a terrible LSAT instructor. I can't always verbally explain why I know a given answer is correct or incorrect. It just is.
Last edited by P.J.Fry on Mon Aug 11, 2014 12:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
CincinnatusND
Posts: 134
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:54 pm

Re: Questions for "Naturals"

Postby CincinnatusND » Mon Aug 11, 2014 12:16 pm

I hit 168 on my cold, timed diagnostic and scored above the 99th percentile mark, after around 2 months of study, on test day. I think my study plan was a bit shit because I got the same score as I got on an administered practice exam from Kaplan that I took a week and a half after my diagnostic, but whatever.

I've just always done well on standardized tests. I got perfect scores on the ACT/SAT reading and math sections with no focused preparation. I do tend to read a lot. I regularly read the New Yorker, random fantasy and scifi novels, and sporadically I'll pick up a 'classic' novel to read through. I've also read pretty much every piece of romantic poetry I could get my hands on. I really enjoy art-house style cinema. I probably watch 1-3 films a week. I'm fluent in a second language, which may have helped. I took an informal logic class in college, and worked through logic puzzles a lot in my youth.

I would say that while it probably helps to have a background in logic and to be an avid reader, it isn't necessary or sufficient to doing well on the LSAT. In the context of preparing adequately for the LSAT, any time you'd commit to being well read would likely be better spent drilling LSAT questions. That being said, I enjoy reading and think it is a worthwhile hobby.

jmjm
Posts: 329
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 1:59 am

Re: Questions for "Naturals"

Postby jmjm » Mon Aug 11, 2014 11:43 pm

CincinnatusND wrote:I hit 168 on my cold, timed diagnostic and scored above the 99th percentile mark, after around 2 months of study, on test day. I think my study plan was a bit shit because I got the same score as I got on an administered practice exam from Kaplan that I took a week and a half after my diagnostic, but whatever.

I've just always done well on standardized tests. I got perfect scores on the ACT/SAT reading and math sections with no focused preparation. I do tend to read a lot. I regularly read the New Yorker, random fantasy and scifi novels, and sporadically I'll pick up a 'classic' novel to read through. I've also read pretty much every piece of romantic poetry I could get my hands on. I really enjoy art-house style cinema. I probably watch 1-3 films a week. I'm fluent in a second language, which may have helped. I took an informal logic class in college, and worked through logic puzzles a lot in my youth.

I would say that while it probably helps to have a background in logic and to be an avid reader, it isn't necessary or sufficient to doing well on the LSAT. In the context of preparing adequately for the LSAT, any time you'd commit to being well read would likely be better spent drilling LSAT questions. That being said, I enjoy reading and think it is a worthwhile hobby.


what books did you read in the logic class; which classic novels? how fast do you go through rc/lr passages and questions?

User avatar
CincinnatusND
Posts: 134
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:54 pm

Re: Questions for "Naturals"

Postby CincinnatusND » Tue Aug 12, 2014 4:07 pm

jmjm wrote:
what books did you read in the logic class; which classic novels? how fast do you go through rc/lr passages and questions?


We primarily used "A Concise Introduction to Logic," 11th edition, Thompson-Wadsworth,
Author: Patrick J. Hurley.

As far as reading I would personally recommend Hemingway, Raymond Carver, Chuck Palahniuk, Bret Easton Ellis, Kafka, Günther Grass, and Raymond Bradbury. There isn't much rhyme or reason in this list other than that they are some of my favorite authors and are mostly accessible. If you are into poetry, check out Wordsworth, Keats, P. B. Shelley, William Blake, and Goethe.

I normally finished LR sections 5-6 minutes early and did not have much time to spare at the end of RC sections, but I tended to reread a lot of material while choosing my answers.

jmjm
Posts: 329
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 1:59 am

Re: Questions for "Naturals"

Postby jmjm » Wed May 06, 2015 9:25 pm

bumping for naturals during the recent LSATs and this cycle, share how you do well

LifeGoals
Posts: 63
Joined: Sat May 09, 2015 12:36 am

Re: Questions for "Naturals"

Postby LifeGoals » Sat May 09, 2015 12:47 am

I scored a 179 on my first preptest, took a second LSAT IMMEDIATELY afterwards up into the middle of the night to check the effects of fatigue and got a 178, and the third preptest 2 days later (Sept 1998) was a 180 with 2 questions to spare. Next test was a 180 as well (Dec 1999). Continuing practice to try and make sure nothing stops me from getting that 180 on the June test.

My hobbies include reading (old) philosophy, arguing about politics with people who are very picky about logic, watching foreign films, exercising, chess and other games, and a couple oddball things that might give my identity away. An "Intro to Logic" class at your local State University is honestly probably a better investment than an LSAT prep class, in my personal opinion. I don't really write anything down during LR and RC and mainly approach LG through hypo-testing while re-using my old hypos to maintain speed.

User avatar
Clyde Frog
Posts: 7130
Joined: Sun May 26, 2013 2:27 am

Re: Questions for "Naturals"

Postby Clyde Frog » Sat May 09, 2015 6:25 am

LifeGoals wrote:I scored a 179 on my first preptest, took a second LSAT IMMEDIATELY afterwards up into the middle of the night to check the effects of fatigue and got a 178, and the third preptest 2 days later (Sept 1998) was a 180 with 2 questions to spare. Next test was a 180 as well (Dec 1999). Continuing practice to try and make sure nothing stops me from getting that 180 on the June test.

My hobbies include reading (old) philosophy, arguing about politics with people who are very picky about logic, watching foreign films, exercising, chess and other games, and a couple oddball things that might give my identity away. An "Intro to Logic" class at your local State University is honestly probably a better investment than an LSAT prep class, in my personal opinion. I don't really write anything down during LR and RC and mainly approach LG through hypo-testing while re-using my old hypos to maintain speed.



We believe you. Good call on hiding your true identity!

User avatar
RZ5646
Posts: 2391
Joined: Fri May 30, 2014 1:31 pm

Re: Questions for "Naturals"

Postby RZ5646 » Sat May 09, 2015 11:37 am

Summary: Reading is good for you.

Also, correlation / causation.

tskela
Posts: 338
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2014 7:41 pm

Re: Questions for "Naturals"

Postby tskela » Sat May 09, 2015 11:45 am

Not a natural in LG or LR by any stretch of the imagination but I got -0 on the very first RC section I ever did and still rarely ever miss a question in RC. I read pretty quickly. I don't actually do a lot of heavy reading at all outside of what's required for class (usually I don't even read that) but most of my free alone time is spent reading random articles on Vice or the New Yorker or whatever. Whatever sounds interesting especially if it's a long and really in-depth. Those are so fun and indulgent. Columbia J-school's report of the whole Rolling Stone UVA Rape reporting thing comes to mind. Mostly pop culture, social sciences, etc. Nothing dull or heavy ever (no politics or economics). But light junk reading in place of like, Netflix, in my free time seems to be enough for me.

I'm decentish at LR, started at -3 in a section before studying and now around -0 or -1 average. Took a formal logic class for my philosophy major. Our textbook was Language, Proof and Logic and we did a lot of work on Boole, Fitch and Tarski's World. Doesn't seem to have helped me on LG though. Can't diagram to save my life and usually go like -5

User avatar
SweetTort
Posts: 2444
Joined: Tue Jul 30, 2013 3:57 pm

Re: Questions for "Naturals"

Postby SweetTort » Sat May 09, 2015 12:20 pm

I did debate all throughout high school and college, so my diagnostic for LR was -2. After you knock out half of the test without trying, it makes it easier to focus on your weaker subjects.

LifeGoals
Posts: 63
Joined: Sat May 09, 2015 12:36 am

Re: Questions for "Naturals"

Postby LifeGoals » Sat May 09, 2015 2:31 pm

Clyde Frog wrote:
LifeGoals wrote:I scored a 179 on my first preptest, took a second LSAT IMMEDIATELY afterwards up into the middle of the night to check the effects of fatigue and got a 178, and the third preptest 2 days later (Sept 1998) was a 180 with 2 questions to spare. Next test was a 180 as well (Dec 1999). Continuing practice to try and make sure nothing stops me from getting that 180 on the June test.

My hobbies include reading (old) philosophy, arguing about politics with people who are very picky about logic, watching foreign films, exercising, chess and other games, and a couple oddball things that might give my identity away. An "Intro to Logic" class at your local State University is honestly probably a better investment than an LSAT prep class, in my personal opinion. I don't really write anything down during LR and RC and mainly approach LG through hypo-testing while re-using my old hypos to maintain speed.



We believe you. Good call on hiding your true identity!


Sorry, is that sarcasm? I did spend an entire day burning through the Powerscore LG Bible before my first preptest, so those scores aren't purely 'natural' in that sense. If I had taken a Preptest entirely cold I estimate it would have landed around 173-175.

User avatar
Clyde Frog
Posts: 7130
Joined: Sun May 26, 2013 2:27 am

Re: Questions for "Naturals"

Postby Clyde Frog » Sat May 09, 2015 2:50 pm

LifeGoals wrote:
Clyde Frog wrote:
LifeGoals wrote:I scored a 179 on my first preptest, took a second LSAT IMMEDIATELY afterwards up into the middle of the night to check the effects of fatigue and got a 178, and the third preptest 2 days later (Sept 1998) was a 180 with 2 questions to spare. Next test was a 180 as well (Dec 1999). Continuing practice to try and make sure nothing stops me from getting that 180 on the June test.

My hobbies include reading (old) philosophy, arguing about politics with people who are very picky about logic, watching foreign films, exercising, chess and other games, and a couple oddball things that might give my identity away. An "Intro to Logic" class at your local State University is honestly probably a better investment than an LSAT prep class, in my personal opinion. I don't really write anything down during LR and RC and mainly approach LG through hypo-testing while re-using my old hypos to maintain speed.



We believe you. Good call on hiding your true identity!


Sorry, is that sarcasm? I did spend an entire day burning through the Powerscore LG Bible before my first preptest, so those scores aren't purely 'natural' in that sense. If I had taken a Preptest entirely cold I estimate it would have landed around 173-175.



The fact that you're hiding your identity on here makes me think that a quick browse of your post history would confirm that you're being dishonest. Why not post on your regular name on here? Are you a superhero?

User avatar
Poldy
Posts: 917
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2015 12:17 am

Re: Questions for "Naturals"

Postby Poldy » Sat May 09, 2015 2:59 pm

I've said it here before and I am absolutely convinced I'm right that a decently well educated adult should not have to spend months studying for this test. It is a test of skills you should have developed over your life, especially during your undergrad years. Reading the classics and other literature, studying math and philosophy, solving issues in the workplace, etc. All these things should build up the necessary skills for doing well on the LSAT. The only thing difficult about it is working within the time limit. I took one prep test the day before my actual test to get a feel for the time and that was it. I think I performed pretty well and I don't see how additional study would have helped.

I know that isn't a popular opinion and there are probably plenty of people who did better than I did who will disagree. That's fine, you've got to do what works for you. I just don't get it.

LifeGoals
Posts: 63
Joined: Sat May 09, 2015 12:36 am

Re: Questions for "Naturals"

Postby LifeGoals » Sat May 09, 2015 3:34 pm

Clyde Frog wrote:
LifeGoals wrote:
Clyde Frog wrote:
LifeGoals wrote:I scored a 179 on my first preptest, took a second LSAT IMMEDIATELY afterwards up into the middle of the night to check the effects of fatigue and got a 178, and the third preptest 2 days later (Sept 1998) was a 180 with 2 questions to spare. Next test was a 180 as well (Dec 1999). Continuing practice to try and make sure nothing stops me from getting that 180 on the June test.

My hobbies include reading (old) philosophy, arguing about politics with people who are very picky about logic, watching foreign films, exercising, chess and other games, and a couple oddball things that might give my identity away. An "Intro to Logic" class at your local State University is honestly probably a better investment than an LSAT prep class, in my personal opinion. I don't really write anything down during LR and RC and mainly approach LG through hypo-testing while re-using my old hypos to maintain speed.



We believe you. Good call on hiding your true identity!


Sorry, is that sarcasm? I did spend an entire day burning through the Powerscore LG Bible before my first preptest, so those scores aren't purely 'natural' in that sense. If I had taken a Preptest entirely cold I estimate it would have landed around 173-175.



The fact that you're hiding your identity on here makes me think that a quick browse of your post history would confirm that you're being dishonest. Why not post on your regular name on here? Are you a superhero?


This is actually just my first and only account here. I was saying I didn't want to include a couple more oddball hobbies/activities in case I continue to post here (the forums have been helpful thus far) and adcomms figure out who I am, although I suppose it's not like I'm planning on posting anything that would bother them.

User avatar
Clyde Frog
Posts: 7130
Joined: Sun May 26, 2013 2:27 am

Re: Questions for "Naturals"

Postby Clyde Frog » Sat May 09, 2015 5:16 pm

RancidSumo wrote:I've said it here before and I am absolutely convinced I'm right that a decently well educated adult should not have to spend months studying for this test. It is a test of skills you should have developed over your life, especially during your undergrad years. Reading the classics and other literature, studying math and philosophy, solving issues in the workplace, etc. All these things should build up the necessary skills for doing well on the LSAT. The only thing difficult about it is working within the time limit. I took one prep test the day before my actual test to get a feel for the time and that was it. I think I performed pretty well and I don't see how additional study would have helped.

I know that isn't a popular opinion and there are probably plenty of people who did better than I did who will disagree. That's fine, you've got to do what works for you. I just don't get it.


So you don't understand prepping for a couple months as opposed to spending your life reading classics/literature, studying math and philosophy ect., and scoring in the same range? Scoring high on the LSAT is not that big of an accomplishment. You can learn the skills that are required for the LSAT without not having a social life.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: dontsaywhatyoumean, snowycc and 1 guest