JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Daily_Double
Posts: 1035
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 8:45 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby Daily_Double » Tue Mar 05, 2013 12:33 am

bdeans91, no other flaws were in the answer choices, well I mean one said sampling but phrased it incorrectly, one used some very poor logic, the others were out of scope, but the reason I liked this stimulus is because it's a simple question that would almost be easier without answers. I like the process of covering the answers on review and just trying to answer them myself, just because one wrong answer might have been tempting if you hadn't already figured out what the flaw was, which is what I'm kind of trying to give to you guys through these examples.

And John_rizzy_rawls, the answer you mentioned, at least I think described the people surveyed, in this example dentists, as being unqualified to opine upon the subject which the product related to. In both this example and in the actual question I based this off of, some experts in a field which the product related to were surveyed, so it's not an improper lay opinion. Furthermore, it's not appealing to the public, which would be saying that the public says X, therefore it is X, it's simply saying that you should do this because some amount of experts said it's better than the rest.

bdeans91
Posts: 88
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 1:43 am

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby bdeans91 » Tue Mar 05, 2013 1:54 am

When I am doing LR questions by type (to learn the question types), should I be drilling them (timed, in sets of 10 or 20 questions) or should I be just trying to do as many of the questions as possible and going 100% for accuracy?

I am also going to be doing a bunch of PTs and 10 sets of full LR sections over the next few months so I will be exposed to a lot of timed LR.

I have been doing the drilling method, but right now I just casually did 25 flaw questions with a little less pressure on me and I feel like I am actually breaking down the argument more, practicing pre-phrasing, etc. Instead of just worrying about my time I am focused more on quality.

Thoughts?

User avatar
wtrc
Posts: 2057
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 9:37 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby wtrc » Tue Mar 05, 2013 2:11 am

bdeans91 wrote:When I am doing LR questions by type (to learn the question types), should I be drilling them (timed, in sets of 10 or 20 questions) or should I be just trying to do as many of the questions as possible and going 100% for accuracy?

I am also going to be doing a bunch of PTs and 10 sets of full LR sections over the next few months so I will be exposed to a lot of timed LR.

I have been doing the drilling method, but right now I just casually did 25 flaw questions with a little less pressure on me and I feel like I am actually breaking down the argument more, practicing pre-phrasing, etc. Instead of just worrying about my time I am focused more on quality.

Thoughts?


Do you have trouble with timing on LR during PT's?

When I started drilling each type I wanted to primarily focus on accuracy. I would time myself- but not look at the time until I did 25 (or, sometimes 15, or 20, or 30, etc.) questions. Then I'd make a note of any types where timing really was an issue. But timing has never really been an issue in LR for me- accuracy is my problem- so I guess it really depends. If not timing yourself means you are "breaking down the argument more... and focused on quality" then I think you answered your own question :). We've got more than 3 months, still time to hammer out the fundamentals.

User avatar
crazyrobin
Posts: 442
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 2:52 am

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby crazyrobin » Tue Mar 05, 2013 2:15 am

bdeans91, we are in a similar situation. What I am doing now is do untimed drilling, I focus on accuracy only. But I do 1-2 timed LR every day or every other day.

For both timed and untimed LR I will blind review if I get anything wrong. I also implement DD's suggestion, namely go deep into Qs (which means when you are asked to identify a flaw, I go deep to think about strengthen/weaken answer choices). This method helps a lot, now I am semi-confident about LR. Within couple days, if not weeks, I think I will be on track with full time PT.

User avatar
bmore_md
Posts: 185
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 9:52 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby bmore_md » Tue Mar 05, 2013 3:01 am

Does anyone else strangely enjoy studying for the LSAT? As a competitive person I find it interesting and easy to find motivation somewhat like a sporting event.

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

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby John_rizzy_rawls » Tue Mar 05, 2013 3:07 am

bmore_md wrote:Does anyone else strangely enjoy studying for the LSAT? As a competitive person I find it interesting and easy to find motivation somewhat like a sporting event.


Yup. Big time, more fun than I've ever had doing schoolwork. Shit's like a puzzle I know I can make my bitch. I enjoy that feeling.

IB4WeirdInterpretations

Daily_Double
Posts: 1035
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 8:45 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby Daily_Double » Tue Mar 05, 2013 9:07 am

bmore_md wrote:Does anyone else strangely enjoy studying for the LSAT? As a competitive person I find it interesting and easy to find motivation somewhat like a sporting event.


Same.

User avatar
CardozoLaw09
Posts: 1747
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 1:58 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby CardozoLaw09 » Tue Mar 05, 2013 9:41 am

Daily_Double wrote:
bmore_md wrote:Does anyone else strangely enjoy studying for the LSAT? As a competitive person I find it interesting and easy to find motivation somewhat like a sporting event.


Same.


+1

User avatar
crazyrobin
Posts: 442
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 2:52 am

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby crazyrobin » Tue Mar 05, 2013 10:32 am

CardozoLaw09 wrote:
Daily_Double wrote:
bmore_md wrote:Does anyone else strangely enjoy studying for the LSAT? As a competitive person I find it interesting and easy to find motivation somewhat like a sporting event.


Same.


+1

+2

User avatar
wtrc
Posts: 2057
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 9:37 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby wtrc » Tue Mar 05, 2013 11:12 am

crazyrobin wrote:
CardozoLaw09 wrote:
Daily_Double wrote:
bmore_md wrote:Does anyone else strangely enjoy studying for the LSAT? As a competitive person I find it interesting and easy to find motivation somewhat like a sporting event.


Same.


+1

+2


+3. I <3 this thread sometimes

User avatar
Sourrudedude
Posts: 415
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 1:34 pm

.

Postby Sourrudedude » Tue Mar 05, 2013 11:58 am

.
Last edited by Sourrudedude on Thu Sep 26, 2013 12:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
warandpeace
Posts: 301
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 1:43 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby warandpeace » Tue Mar 05, 2013 12:09 pm

Hey everyone. Will anyone repost the list of PTs (in the order you guys are taking them)? I've searched the thread and couldn't find it.
Much appreciated!

bdeans91
Posts: 88
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 1:43 am

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby bdeans91 » Tue Mar 05, 2013 12:24 pm

crazyrobin wrote:
CardozoLaw09 wrote:
Daily_Double wrote:
bmore_md wrote:Does anyone else strangely enjoy studying for the LSAT? As a competitive person I find it interesting and easy to find motivation somewhat like a sporting event.


Same.


+1

+2


But not RC. RC is like the drama/artsy kids.

User avatar
Sourrudedude
Posts: 415
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 1:34 pm

.

Postby Sourrudedude » Tue Mar 05, 2013 12:24 pm

.
Last edited by Sourrudedude on Thu Sep 26, 2013 12:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Daily_Double
Posts: 1035
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 8:45 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby Daily_Double » Tue Mar 05, 2013 1:00 pm

Sourrudedude wrote:
warandpeace wrote:Hey everyone. Will anyone repost the list of PTs (in the order you guys are taking them)? I've searched the thread and couldn't find it.
Much appreciated!

Look on the first page in the second comment.


Just know that they are relative, people are busy and it's impossible to stick to a PT plan religiously, technically I'm behind in my own PT plan, although I knew that would happen at the beginning so at the end of my plan is about three weeks of make up time.

User avatar
the_pakalypse
Posts: 208
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 3:34 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby the_pakalypse » Tue Mar 05, 2013 1:41 pm

Hey all. Retaker here, good to see everyone's progress.

I'm a bit unsure whether we need to check a conditional statement AND its contrapositives to see if a hypothetical is correct.

For example, if A -> B. And the sufficient condition is missing, then we wouldn't need to check the contrapositive of not B -> not A because the negation of the sufficient condition satisfies the necessary condition in the contrapositive. Seems pretty obvious but I'm just wondering if I'm missing an exception or something...

rebexness
Posts: 4163
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 6:24 am

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby rebexness » Tue Mar 05, 2013 1:43 pm

bdeans91 wrote:
But not RC. RC is like the drama/artsy kids.


I resemble this remark.

Daily_Double
Posts: 1035
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 8:45 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby Daily_Double » Tue Mar 05, 2013 1:46 pm

This isn't a pattern, it's just the subject of one of my assignments. So I reworded it and thought it would be appropriate in the form of an LSAT question.

Moran: Although the district judge made a legal error which led to his acquittal of Lamar Evans, because Evans was acquitted, the Double Jeopardy Clause bars further retrial. Therefore, if the acquittal, however it is labeled, constitutes a determination on the merits that the government failed to prove its case, then jeopardy attaches, and Evans should not be retried.

Baughman: By making a legal error, the district judge essentially forced the prosecution to prove an additional element, and the resulting acquittal was a determination of a crime which was not the one for which he was charged. Therefore his acquittal was not proper and the Double Jeopardy Clause does not bar further retrial in this matter.

The dialogue above most strongly supports the claim that Moran and Baughman disagree with each other about which of the following?

ready4180
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2012 2:04 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby ready4180 » Tue Mar 05, 2013 2:13 pm

Daily_Double wrote:Moran: Although the district judge made a legal error which led to his acquittal of Lamar Evans, because Evans was acquitted, the Double Jeopardy Clause bars further retrial. Therefore, if the acquittal, however it is labeled, constitutes a determination on the merits that the government failed to prove its case, then jeopardy attaches, and Evans should not be retried.

Baughman: By making a legal error, the district judge essentially forced the prosecution to prove an additional element, and the resulting acquittal was a determination of a crime which was not the one for which he was charged. Therefore his acquittal was not proper and the Double Jeopardy Clause does not bar further retrial in this matter.

The dialogue above most strongly supports the claim that Moran and Baughman disagree with each other about which of the following?


Taking a stab at this — whether the DJ clause bars further retrial?

User avatar
wtrc
Posts: 2057
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 9:37 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby wtrc » Tue Mar 05, 2013 2:22 pm

Daily_Double wrote:This isn't a pattern, it's just the subject of one of my assignments. So I reworded it and thought it would be appropriate in the form of an LSAT question.

Moran: Although the district judge made a legal error which led to his acquittal of Lamar Evans, because Evans was acquitted, the Double Jeopardy Clause bars further retrial. Therefore, if the acquittal, however it is labeled, constitutes a determination on the merits that the government failed to prove its case, then jeopardy attaches, and Evans should not be retried.

Baughman: By making a legal error, the district judge essentially forced the prosecution to prove an additional element, and the resulting acquittal was a determination of a crime which was not the one for which he was charged. Therefore his acquittal was not proper and the Double Jeopardy Clause does not bar further retrial in this matter.

The dialogue above most strongly supports the claim that Moran and Baughman disagree with each other about which of the following?


Whether the Double Jeopardy clause, which bars retrial, still applies in acquittals due to legal error.

User avatar
eliztudorr
Posts: 187
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 8:50 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby eliztudorr » Tue Mar 05, 2013 3:16 pm

rebexness wrote:
bdeans91 wrote:
But not RC. RC is like the drama/artsy kids.


I resemble this remark.


you totally categorized RC for me...

User avatar
redecember
Posts: 33
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2012 7:38 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby redecember » Tue Mar 05, 2013 3:56 pm

bmore_md wrote:Does anyone else strangely enjoy studying for the LSAT? As a competitive person I find it interesting and easy to find motivation somewhat like a sporting event.


Motivation + Sports = http://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/19 ... _athletic/

thought you guys would appreciate. Let's kill PT69

User avatar
CardozoLaw09
Posts: 1747
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 1:58 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby CardozoLaw09 » Tue Mar 05, 2013 4:03 pm

redecember wrote:
bmore_md wrote:Does anyone else strangely enjoy studying for the LSAT? As a competitive person I find it interesting and easy to find motivation somewhat like a sporting event.


Motivation + Sports = http://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/19 ... _athletic/

thought you guys would appreciate. Let's kill PT69


Sick article, Kobe is a beast - thanks for sharing.

bdeans91
Posts: 88
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 1:43 am

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby bdeans91 » Tue Mar 05, 2013 4:22 pm

weathercoins wrote:
Daily_Double wrote:This isn't a pattern, it's just the subject of one of my assignments. So I reworded it and thought it would be appropriate in the form of an LSAT question.

Moran: Although the district judge made a legal error which led to his acquittal of Lamar Evans, because Evans was acquitted, the Double Jeopardy Clause bars further retrial. Therefore, if the acquittal, however it is labeled, constitutes a determination on the merits that the government failed to prove its case, then jeopardy attaches, and Evans should not be retried.

Baughman: By making a legal error, the district judge essentially forced the prosecution to prove an additional element, and the resulting acquittal was a determination of a crime which was not the one for which he was charged. Therefore his acquittal was not proper and the Double Jeopardy Clause does not bar further retrial in this matter.

The dialogue above most strongly supports the claim that Moran and Baughman disagree with each other about which of the following?


Whether the Double Jeopardy clause, which bars retrial, still applies in acquittals due to legal error.


Whether the Double Jeopardy clause attaches from the acquittal.

0913djp
Posts: 206
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 10:26 am

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby 0913djp » Tue Mar 05, 2013 4:36 pm

Taking this week sort of easy...hopefully will get back on the grizzy this Sunday. Five to six hours a day and hopefully PTing for the first time next weekend.

I feel a lot more confident in Logic Reasoning and Reading Comp...still struggling on some of the advanced LG's and obviously grouping.

I drill ten games a day and still find myself getting a few wrong. Any suggestions?




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Veil of Ignorance and 9 guests