Is there a biological reason why some people can't do LG? Forum

[Richie Tenenbaum]

Jordan went to laney high in Wilmington, NC. laney High has never won a state championship, in a state not particularly known for basketball.

The fact that Laney high has never won a state championship is helpful, but not determinative when it comes to whether the basketball program was competitive when MJ was there. Going to the school website would indicate that they didn't win any regional, sectional, or conference championships while MJ was there. That's probably even more helpful. Still would be helpful to know more.

And it's weird to me that you keep on resorting to the idea of the geographical location of the school is somehow very helpful when it comes to high school basketball competitiveness. Oak Hill is in Virginia--is Virginia particularly well-known for basketball? My impression has been that high school basketball has a ton of very competitive private schools and they are located all over the place.

[charles_g]

oak hill is in virginia, a state not particular known for high school basketball talent. how does oak hill do compared to competition against other schools in virginia? laney isn't necessarily competitive in a state that's not known for being competitive. and i may be wrong, but i feel like the hampton roads area and richmond are known for producing top talent. i don't know of anywhere in north carolina that produces top talent. i feel like florida, georgia, texas, new york, new jersey, ohio, and california are the states with the top schools year after year. I will admit I don't know if that was the case then, of course, i was too young. I just feel like Jordan thought he deserved to play varsity and didn't make the team. A lot of people would have given up.

[charles_g]

I'll admit maybe I haven't considered both side. Maybe it is a bad comparison. But, I really don't think it is.

[dingbat]

you're probably just not as smart as you thought you were.

this

This.

honestly, it doesn't mean you're not smart, it just means you're not smart in that way. Not everyone's brains are wired for logic games. Yes, it is a learnable skill, but you still need to have talent. there are people who are very smart but don't have a mind for logic, just as there are people who are very logical who don't have a mind for languages.

To get on the Michael Jordan analogy, he was an amazing athlete, but he wasn't anywhere near as good at baseball as he was at basketball. Or just imagine an offensive linesman trying to run the 110 meter hurdles.
Lacking one type of talent doesn't mean you're not lacking of talent altogether, it just means you should consider a different field

[charles_g]

I did later consider baseball. Michael Jordan tried and, by professionally athlete standards, failed. However he's a lot better than me. Regardless the kid is aiming for high 160s and is at 158. Sounds doable. If he was aiming for a 175 then it would be another story.

[dingbat]

I did later consider baseball. Michael Jordan tried and, by professionally athlete standards, failed. However he's a lot better than me. Regardless the kid is aiming for high 160s and is at 158. Sounds doable. If he was aiming for a 175 then it would be another story.

Considering he spent 3 months studying, my advice would be to try again, study real hard, and see if there's a noticeable improvement. If not, there's an answer in and of itself

[Barack O'Drama]

Here's how the story relates. Michael Jordan thought he was good (OP thought he was smart). The coach thought he was only good enough to play jv (the LSAT thought OP was only smart enough to go to a tier 3). Michael Jordan goes on to become the greatest of all time (OP goes on to...). Michael Jordan could have given up. A lot of people give up when they don't get what they think they deserve. Some people work harder.

Haha I second this ... I'll agree the story is a bit trite and overused, however, I think you can learn from it. Don't give up! Work harder, and never aim for anything below a 180. Would you study for an U.G test and aim for a 75? I mean sure a 165 is decent, but keep in mind -especially in this economy, I might add- that what school you are accepted to and ultimately choose to attend will have a direct correlation to employment prospects.

Overall, Don't worry about genetics. Find what works for you and whoever mentioned -Sorry on my phone- doing the easier ones "till you want to puke" has a really good point. Good luck O.P

[JamMasterJ]

Yes some people are inherently better at spacial reasoning, though whether that's nature or nurture is beyond me. However, the LG section isn't so advanced that most people can't at least get to a satisfactory level - where you can make up the difference by being really good at LR/RC.

[FloridaCoastalorbust]

you're probably just not as smart as you thought you were.

hahaha thanks for this

[willwash]

Jordan went to laney high in Wilmington, NC. laney High has never won a state championship, in a state not particularly known for basketball.

You kidding? NC is the most basketball crazy state in the country! We have the UNC/Duke rivalry, plus NC State and Wake Forest, another 2 very good programs, and a plethora of smaller teams etc etc...while the NBA has little presence in the state, NC has produced many of the game's greatest players, from Jordan to Vince Carter, Stackhouse, James Worthy, etc etc...

[180wanabe]

I did later consider baseball. Michael Jordan tried and, by professionally athlete standards, failed. However he's a lot better than me. Regardless the kid is aiming for high 160s and is at 158. Sounds doable. If he was aiming for a 175 then it would be another story.

I actually consider myself more like Tim Tebow than MJ. He was good at running the ball and hand offs, but he had one weakness that was really holding him back, he couldn't throw. Logic Games are to me what passing was to him. My RC and LR skills might barely get me in the playoffs, but without logic games I'll never make it to the superbowl. Well, that's my best attempt at a sports analogy, lol.

[charles_g]

i'm not talking about ncaa. i'm talking about high school. look at a national top 25 or the rivals 150. there are zero nc schools in the top 25. there are 2 players in the top 150 from nc. there are three from one high school in west virginia. i repeat, west virginia.

“I've missed more than 9000 shots in my career. I've lost almost 300 games. 26 times, I've been trusted to take the game winning shot and missed. I've failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed.”
― Michael Jordan

[whereskyle]

To 180wannabe: Logic games seem like a plateau. You've got to get to the point at which you are not thinking but seeing. Work on the advanced section of the LG bible. Learn to diagram correctly for each game type. The only way to prime yourself is to test 35 minute sections of four games. Grab old preptests and just drill logic game sections for weeks. Forget there are other sections. You've gotta do four games in thirty-five minutes in your studying. You will speed up and start to get the first questions for each game with great rapidity. Soon your bottom will be ten points higher, and you'll score a 170 on an off day like me!

[whereskyle]

But honestly, 180wanabe, I studied logic games exclusively for months and never thought it would become my strongest section.

[steel_shot]

I'll start off by saying I am bad at logic games. I studied very hard for them for 3 months straight and I can still rarely get to the third game, despite the fact that I do relatively well in the other sections. This may be a silly question, but I'll ask it anyway. Is there a biological reason why some people, such as myself, can't do logic games? As far as I know, I do not have any sort of learning disability. I just wonder sometimes, is there something about my brain that keeps the proper neurons from firing when I need to complete a logic game? Just wondering if anyone else has had this interesting, and perhaps silly, thought. Thanks.

Yes, to some extent there are limitations (for the vast majority of ppl) on how well a person can do on the LSAT. That said, if you have a math or logic (i.e. serious formal philosophy background) you are more likely to be able to reach any innate potential that may exist in terms of the logic games. Many people struggle with this section, and contrary to what some people say, it is not necessarily a section that you can simply learn to master (unless you have the underlying ability in the first place, and also have some sort of technical analytical training such as a strong math or science background--in many cases at least).

I'm a management major, and was able to become proficient (usually 0 to -2) in the LG section. I took one calc course in my first year, and intro to philosophy as well. I don't doubt that there is some sort of limit on a person's LSAT ability, but I don't think you need the backgrounds you say to do well in it.

[whereskyle]

Opinion: I do not think there is a limit. Honest studying throughout all of the "oh my effing gosh, this is impossible" moments will bring you to perfection, at least in the logic games. I have literally no math background. I studied Greek and Latin. Studying LG, I grew frustrated, and I swore that I would never improve.

Fact: My first preptest I went 13/22 on LG. On game day, I went 22/23. Thanks almost entirely to LG studying, I went from a 159 to a 170.

Advice: Before you start drilling the LG sections, you need to be versed in the advanced section of the LG Bible. Know which games demand which diagrams, and be able to diagram quickly and accurately, like its second nature. Take your time becoming a reliable diagrammer. Then, drill sections of games until you can do some sections with minutes to spare. Make LG your baby. Show it that its special, because it is. You gotta love it with your heart.

[whereskyle]

Now that I have read over the thread, because I'm so jazzed that I can be of assistance, I must recommend PowerScore Logic Games Bible to you. Follow their directions and learn to diagram.

[jrsbaseball5]

Michael Jordan was cut from is high school basketball team and went on to be the best ever. He didn't quit. But then again, I don't imagine he had you're negative attitude, either. So I'd say it's a toss-up. Really, you might as well give up.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=a ... hall091209

Read about middle of the paragraph where it says that another player was kept on the varsity team because of his size and MJ was left as a sophomore to play JV. I agree with your point however, that just because we fail doesn't mean we should give up. Other good sports examples are Mark Buerhle and Jermaine O'Neal though neither are even close to MJ's magnitude.

[180wanabe]

Now that I have read over the thread, because I'm so jazzed that I can be of assistance, I must recommend PowerScore Logic Games Bible to you. Follow their directions and learn to diagram.

Cool, I've actually gotten the LG Bible and I have done all of the games and diagramming, though this was after I took my last LSAT. I'm in no rush to take the LSAT, so I'll take your advice and just diagram and hammer out logic games for the next few months. Thanks again

[180wanabe]

Stop trying to figure out all the magical inferences. Plug and chug. The games are made in a way where the geniuses finish the section in 15 minutes while people like you and me, if we practice and stick to a systematic approach, finish with about a minute left.

Velocity games bro/babe.

Finishing with a minute left would be fantastic. I'm not out to break any sort of LG time record, humble mortals such as myself are just trying to complete the section. Thank you for the advice.

[boblawlob]

Yes, there is a biological reason why some people can't do LG. This all stems from the prefrontal cortex, the part of the brain that helps to focus thoughts, which enables people to pay attention, learn, and concentrate on goals. Because their prefrontal cortex might not be "wired" properly, they have an easier time giving up on their goals and or making excuses as to why they can't do x and y.

Edit: Some adderall might help.

[whereskyle]

In response to post above, I think studying logic games in particular for significant periods of time can lead to improvement. My reason for posting on this thread is that I was an LG chump who studied them exclusively for 100 hours plus, and I feel that I've improved in whichever respects they're testing. One just starts seeing the inferences one's learned to make with greater rapidity.

[francesfarmer]

Edit: Some adderall might help.

+1

[180wanabe]

In response to post above, I think studying logic games in particular for significant periods of time can lead to improvement. My reason for posting on this thread is that I was an LG chump who studied them exclusively for 100 hours plus, and I feel that I've improved in whichever respects they're testing. One just starts seeing the inferences one's learned to make with greater rapidity.

Thanks, sounds like a plan. Challenge accepted.

[Cerebro]

Never let anyone else be the judge of what you can't do, regardless of their qualifications. You, and only you, are in a position to determine for yourself the level of success that is within your reach.

http://youtu.be/snDQe3tWwRQ