The Official June 2014 Study Group Forum

[birdlaw624]

I take my PTs in my UG library. There's some quiet talking and random noises so I think the atmosphere mimics what test conditions will be like (hopefully). I've tried taking a PT in starbucks and there is just too much going on for me to gain a benefit from it.

[WaltGrace83]

I feel like I am going to become paranoid at people turning pages, as if to imply that I am going too slow or something.

[santoki]

I feel like I am going to become paranoid at people turning pages, as if to imply that I am going too slow or something.

in october 13, girl next to me was flying...i mean FLYING through the test. it got me rattled cause beforehand i was psyching myself into thinking that i was going to be the one intimidating those around me with "speed". STUPID OL' ME.

[rebexness]

guys, where are yall taking your PTs?

I have been taking mine at:

Community College cafeteria (weekend- empty)
big state school hallway/walkways (usually busy)
Public Library (busy area)

I still am using headphones with the 7sage "distractions" on.

[suitsfan]

Considering delaying until September. I feel like I won't be ready by June because even if I finish my drilling process by then, I may not have adequate time to take PTs.

Went through the LSAT trainer and have then just drilled by question types for the past month or so using the walt grace method. Very helpful.

Just curious, how long do you guys usually spend on drilling a question type?

[FlyingNorth]

I feel like I am going to become paranoid at people turning pages, as if to imply that I am going too slow or something.

This shit bothered me at the beginning of my last take, but I got used to it.

Still, I never PT'd in a distracting area. I'm making that my goal leading up to June this time around.

[rebexness]

I feel like I am going to become paranoid at people turning pages, as if to imply that I am going too slow or something.

If you get distracted, just imagine that they are circling random things and flipping the pages

[alexrodriguez]

I don't know about ya'll, but I already feel like a law student.

Spending my days locked up in a library is joyous.

[santoki]

small question...can someone help me negate the following?

"Only findings that an investigator purposely seeks can directly bear on that investigator's research"

THANKS

[WaltGrace83]

small question...can someone help me negate the following?

"Only findings that an investigator purposely seeks can directly bear on that investigator's research"

THANKS

NOT only findings...

or...

There are some other findings than those than an investigator purposefully seeks that can bear directly on the research

or...

What bears directly on the research need not be a finding that an investigator purposefully seeks

What question is this to?

[santoki]

small question...can someone help me negate the following?

"Only findings that an investigator purposely seeks can directly bear on that investigator's research"

THANKS

NOT only findings...

or...

There are some other findings than those than an investigator purposefully seeks that can bear directly on the research

or...

What bears directly on the research need not be a finding that an investigator purposefully seeks

What question is this to?

Thanks. PT7-S1-Q24. Need to brush up on the more [seemingly] complicated negations. I'm thinking in too much of a formulaic way instead of trying to involve reason.

[alexrodriguez]

How comfortable are you guys with In and Out games?

I'm not comfortable with them at all and it's hard for me to believe that you all are pretty good at them...

PT5 Game 3 is a monster.

[WaltGrace83]

small question...can someone help me negate the following?

"Only findings that an investigator purposely seeks can directly bear on that investigator's research"

THANKS

NOT only findings...

or...

There are some other findings than those than an investigator purposefully seeks that can bear directly on the research

or...

What bears directly on the research need not be a finding that an investigator purposefully seeks

What question is this to?

Thanks. PT7-S1-Q24. Need to brush up on the more [seemingly] complicated negations. I'm thinking in too much of a formulaic way instead of trying to involve reason.

IF does not directly bear on funded research THEN investigators ignore it
→
Serendipity no longer plays a role in scientific discovery

We must be assuming that serendipitous discoveries do not bear on research, or if it bears on research it cannot be serendipitous.

This is expressed in (A).

However, you could also screw the negation test here and see why everything else just sucks.

• (B) We don't need to assume this and what has been done in the past is of little relevance here.
  (C) "Personally prefer" - we don't know anything about that
  (D) "Receive at least some of the grants for which they apply" - this is laughably out of scope.
  (E) "Most valuable" - eh... we don't need to assume this. We just need to talk about why serendipity isn't prevalent anymore.

I think I have gotten to the point where the amount of thinking I do is kind of troubling. I feel like when I first started I was very adamant about really THINKING and thinking HARD while doing every little task. Now, I have a much more refined sense of what is in scope and what is out of scope. I don't know if that's a good thing or a bad thing...

....but it is producing fairly favorable results.

[WaltGrace83]

How comfortable are you guys with In and Out games?

I'm not comfortable with them at all and it's hard for me to believe that you all are pretty good at them...

PT5 Game 3 is a monster.

Do you use Manhattan's logic chain? I feel like the chain is the BEST method out there.

[rebexness]

How comfortable are you guys with In and Out games?

I'm not comfortable with them at all and it's hard for me to believe that you all are pretty good at them...

PT5 Game 3 is a monster.

I didn't get comfortable until I ended up watching about 100 of them on 7sage. TYBG when they show up on PTs.
(I don't use the Logic chain)

[alexrodriguez]

JY, the 7sage dude, uses a logic chain... is that the same thing as Manhattans?

[WaltGrace83]

JY, the 7sage dude, uses a logic chain... is that the same thing as Manhattans?

No. This is the Manhattan logic chain. JY just writes out a bunch of conditionals and links them up. Same concept; but IMO Manhattan's chain will absolutely crush most games.

[withoutapaddle]

170+ or bust is my new motto

[givemea180]

How comfortable are you guys with In and Out games?

I'm not comfortable with them at all and it's hard for me to believe that you all are pretty good at them...

PT5 Game 3 is a monster.

In/out games have really come together for me after drilling them over and over. I don't have any experience with Manhattan's chain method though.

Also, you should all buy lululemon shorts to study in. I feel like they give me a solid 3 point boost and will absolutely be wearing them on test day

[10052014]

.

[withoutapaddle]

In and out aren't to bad

I swear this time the LSAC won't get me good with a circular reasoning game

When the LSAC states: A sits at that clock wise table of 16 people when John goes to take a piss and A can't sit at 6 when Patrica orders lobster----Except on Wednesday when John forgets to flush to toilet after taking a piss

I'm going to nail that question

[knowyourself]

^ motivating.

[tfinndogm]

No. This is the Manhattan logic chain. JY just writes out a bunch of conditionals and links them up. Same concept; but IMO Manhattan's chain will absolutely crush most games.

^^^this

[10052014]

.

[10052014]

.