The Official June 2014 Study Group

User avatar
santoki
Posts: 867
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 5:19 pm

Re: The Official June 2014 Study Group

Postby santoki » Tue Apr 29, 2014 2:11 pm

PT17 S2 Q7

help :)

I chose D, not sure why C is correct. The stim says "should" so it doesn't seem like its the ONLY option, which is why I thought C was off.

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

Re: The Official June 2014 Study Group

Postby rebexness » Tue Apr 29, 2014 2:15 pm

Last nights LSAT dream included me forgetting to register, so I guess I'd better take care of that now.

panicpanicpanicpanic

User avatar
WaltGrace83
Posts: 719
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: The Official June 2014 Study Group

Postby WaltGrace83 » Tue Apr 29, 2014 2:31 pm

santoki wrote:PT17 S2 Q7

help :)

I chose D, not sure why C is correct. The stim says "should" so it doesn't seem like its the ONLY option, which is why I thought C was off.


Oh my god I HATED this question. I don't have too much time to break this down (my break time is almost over and I need to get back to weakening arguments). However, think about it like this...

"If we do A, then the fishing industry would cooperate. If we do B, then the fishing industry wouldn't cooperate. Therefore, we should probably do A." What is it assuming? It is assuming that the fishing industry is important - no, maybe NECESSARY.

(C) ~Fishing industry cooperates → ~Accurate count. Bingo!

Learn_Live_Hope
Posts: 1016
Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 9:33 pm

Re: The Official June 2014 Study Group

Postby Learn_Live_Hope » Tue Apr 29, 2014 4:38 pm

rebexness wrote:Last nights LSAT dream included me forgetting to register, so I guess I'd better take care of that now.

panicpanicpanicpanic


You still didn't register? :shock: Need to do that now!

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

Re: The Official June 2014 Study Group

Postby rebexness » Tue Apr 29, 2014 5:25 pm

Learn_Live_Hope wrote:
rebexness wrote:Last nights LSAT dream included me forgetting to register, so I guess I'd better take care of that now.

panicpanicpanicpanic


You still didn't register? :shock: Need to do that now!


All taken care of! :)

User avatar
dasani13
Posts: 1055
Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 3:21 pm

Re: The Official June 2014 Study Group

Postby dasani13 » Tue Apr 29, 2014 5:32 pm

rebexness wrote:Last nights LSAT dream included me forgetting to register, so I guess I'd better take care of that now.

panicpanicpanicpanic


lol I signed up last week- one of the 2 closest centers to me is in a school I've never even heard of and the other in the middle of south beach.

Learn_Live_Hope
Posts: 1016
Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 9:33 pm

Re: The Official June 2014 Study Group

Postby Learn_Live_Hope » Tue Apr 29, 2014 6:16 pm

dasani13 wrote:
rebexness wrote:Last nights LSAT dream included me forgetting to register, so I guess I'd better take care of that now.

panicpanicpanicpanic


lol I signed up last week- one of the 2 closest centers to me is in a school I've never even heard of and the other in the middle of south beach.


Haha i would pick the one in the middle of the south beach.

User avatar
DaRascal
Posts: 1854
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 11:27 pm

Re: The Official June 2014 Study Group

Postby DaRascal » Tue Apr 29, 2014 8:01 pm

How important is it to have a mastery of conditional logic for LR? Is a basic understanding sufficient or does it help a lot more (in terms of saving time) to always think in terms of the "formal approach" as Manhattan LSAT puts it? I'm asking because I'm going through the Manhattan LR book for the umpteenth time and I'm wondering if it'll help if I really internalize Chapter 8 to the point where I'm always thinking in terms of conditional logic when it can be applied. Like most people, I've only ever used it on the exam in LR when a pure conditional logic question comes up and it would only take a few seconds to draw out the conditionals and contrapositives.

User avatar
alexrodriguez
Posts: 841
Joined: Wed May 01, 2013 4:59 am

Re: The Official June 2014 Study Group

Postby alexrodriguez » Tue Apr 29, 2014 8:24 pm

I'm not one to map out conditional logic for sufficient asumps, nec assumps and parallel reasoning

but that doesn't mean I don't understand conditional logic...

It's very important to understand it all and then decide whether you're the kind of person who maps it out

I prefer to let my elephant take the wheel on conditional logic q's and for the most part we get where we need to go

User avatar
mornincounselor
Posts: 1220
Joined: Sun Apr 21, 2013 1:37 am

Post removed.

Postby mornincounselor » Tue Apr 29, 2014 8:26 pm

Post removed.
Last edited by mornincounselor on Mon Nov 09, 2015 1:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
WaltGrace83
Posts: 719
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: The Official June 2014 Study Group

Postby WaltGrace83 » Tue Apr 29, 2014 10:14 pm

I think the point regarding conditional logic is versatility. Sometimes I diagram - sometimes I don't.

On inference questions I seem to diagram a lot. I'd rather get the question right and spend the extra 10-20 seconds then get the question wrong.

On sufficient assumptions, I diagram about 25% of the time.

Otherwise, I hardly ever diagram.

User avatar
Jack Reagan
Posts: 22
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 11:44 pm

Re: The Official June 2014 Study Group

Postby Jack Reagan » Wed Apr 30, 2014 1:57 am

santoki wrote:PT17 S2 Q7

help :)

I chose D, not sure why C is correct. The stim says "should" so it doesn't seem like its the ONLY option, which is why I thought C was off.


Remember that this is a strengthen not a required assumption. If answer choice C is true (which you must assume that it is since it's a strengthen) then it lends support to the government seeking the cooperation of the fisherman. C essentially makes it so that seeking the cooperation is the ONLY option, which then makes the prescription in the conclusion seem like a very reasonable course of action. C is certainly not required to get to the conclusion, but it does help strengthen it. Strong language in an answer choice is great on Strengthen, but suspect on required assumption.

D would actually weaken the argument because then the fishing industry would not turn over the carcasses out of fear of restricted net fishing legislation.

User avatar
myoung7189
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 9:51 am

Re: The Official June 2014 Study Group

Postby myoung7189 » Wed Apr 30, 2014 1:50 pm


User avatar
Louis1127
Posts: 817
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 9:12 pm

Re: The Official June 2014 Study Group

Postby Louis1127 » Thu May 01, 2014 10:01 am

I hate it when I am doing an In-Out game w/ conditional links and mess up contraposing something! EERRRRGGGHHH :evil: :evil: :evil:


Also, I wanted to let all of you know that I am going to go ahead and make it known that I will be withdrawing from June and will be taking September. I have to get alot farther than where I am now to make law school an option for me. Also, I am just going to copy whatever Waltgrace does :o jk.

While I haven't officially delayed from June, I most certainly will in the future. I still want to study with you all until June test day, though.
edit 4 grammar

User avatar
santoki
Posts: 867
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 5:19 pm

Re: The Official June 2014 Study Group

Postby santoki » Thu May 01, 2014 10:39 am

louis, im similarly not feeling as ready as i should for june. however, i may end up taking both...hopefully that's not a really stupid decision haha....

:oops:

User avatar
Pragmatic Gun
Posts: 783
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2013 3:25 pm

Re: The Official June 2014 Study Group

Postby Pragmatic Gun » Thu May 01, 2014 11:05 am

Hey all! retaking the LSAT for the third time. I have a question regarding PT 71, Dec. '13:

I don't understand entirely how S1, Q20 is resovled by the answer. Wouldn't the wool sold be enough to beat the costs of the farm? I feel like it's an incomplete solution.

User avatar
WaltGrace83
Posts: 719
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: The Official June 2014 Study Group

Postby WaltGrace83 » Thu May 01, 2014 11:25 am

Louis1127 wrote:I hate it when I am doing an In-Out game w/ conditional links and mess up contraposing something! EERRRRGGGHHH :evil: :evil: :evil:


Also, I wanted to let all of you know that I am going to go ahead and make it known that I will be withdrawing from June and will be taking September. I have to get alot farther than where I am now to make law school an option for me. Also, I am just going to copy whatever Waltgrace does :o jk.

While I haven't officially delayed from June, I most certainly will in the future. I still want to study with you all until June test day, though.
edit 4 grammar


Well its good to have you on (off?) the wagon Louis. Law school will always be there but crushing the LSAT can only be done a few times! I'll stick around here until June 9 and then off to the September thread for me!

User avatar
Christine (MLSAT)
Posts: 358
Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2013 3:41 pm

Re: The Official June 2014 Study Group

Postby Christine (MLSAT) » Thu May 01, 2014 11:50 am

Pragmatic Gun wrote:Hey all! retaking the LSAT for the third time. I have a question regarding PT 71, Dec. '13:

I don't understand entirely how S1, Q20 is resovled by the answer. Wouldn't the wool sold be enough to beat the costs of the farm? I feel like it's an incomplete solution.


When you say "costs of the farm", do you mean the losses from the decreased prices of mutton/sheepskin/etc? If so, you can't just assume that the wool sold WOULD be enough to beat those losses. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. The fact that these prices fell "sharply" gives a bit more weight toward the decrease being bigger, but we don't know for sure - and that's okay.

The answer does not have to perfectly resolve the situation *for certain*. Answers to paradox or resolve the discrepancy questions merely have to raise a point that could potentially explain the apparent weirdness easily and directly. How could we possibly explain how these peeps are straight up getting more income from their wool, but not getting richer? Well, they must be losing money somehow - either by increased costs somewhere or by decreased profits on something they normally do. An example of either of these would be a great potential explanation for the situation.

Thoughts?

User avatar
Pragmatic Gun
Posts: 783
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2013 3:25 pm

Re: The Official June 2014 Study Group

Postby Pragmatic Gun » Thu May 01, 2014 12:34 pm

Christine (MLSAT) wrote:
Pragmatic Gun wrote:Hey all! retaking the LSAT for the third time. I have a question regarding PT 71, Dec. '13:

I don't understand entirely how S1, Q20 is resovled by the answer. Wouldn't the wool sold be enough to beat the costs of the farm? I feel like it's an incomplete solution.


When you say "costs of the farm", do you mean the losses from the decreased prices of mutton/sheepskin/etc? If so, you can't just assume that the wool sold WOULD be enough to beat those losses. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. The fact that these prices fell "sharply" gives a bit more weight toward the decrease being bigger, but we don't know for sure - and that's okay.

The answer does not have to perfectly resolve the situation *for certain*. Answers to paradox or resolve the discrepancy questions merely have to raise a point that could potentially explain the apparent weirdness easily and directly. How could we possibly explain how these peeps are straight up getting more income from their wool, but not getting richer? Well, they must be losing money somehow - either by increased costs somewhere or by decreased profits on something they normally do. An example of either of these would be a great potential explanation for the situation.

Thoughts?


I think you or I could have written a better question. Sorry. I see what you're saying. It is the best possible answer out of all the other ones because C is the only one that applies directly to the farmers and their situation in the stimulus and tries to resolve the paradox. All the other answers refer to domestic wool farmers or just irrelevant factors.

I picked D because it seemed like it would resolve it, but it's actually irrelevant because these particular farmers aren't in a bad position vis a vis wool.

Also, I just want to say that I was a student of MLSAT. Really happy to see a MLSAT tutor here.

User avatar
unodostres
Posts: 551
Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2013 1:01 pm

Re: The Official June 2014 Study Group

Postby unodostres » Thu May 01, 2014 12:45 pm

Hi everyone. Been studying band haven't posted in this forum since feb. Hope everyone is doing well!

sabzdee
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2014 12:49 pm

Re: The Official June 2014 Study Group

Postby sabzdee » Thu May 01, 2014 12:52 pm

Just took preptest 57 after a week off from studying.

LG: -5 (-4 on the third game which confused the hell out of me)
LR1: -2
LR2: -0
RC: -3

Score was 171. Pretty happy with these results. I want to really shape up my LG, which I think I'll have enough time to do before June. Looking to be in the 175 range, but given that this will be my first go I don't really know what to expect. Good luck to everyone!

User avatar
jk148706
Posts: 2499
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 11:14 am

Re: The Official June 2014 Study Group

Postby jk148706 » Thu May 01, 2014 12:53 pm

.
Last edited by jk148706 on Wed Jun 24, 2015 9:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

sabzdee
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2014 12:49 pm

Re: The Official June 2014 Study Group

Postby sabzdee » Thu May 01, 2014 3:46 pm

jk148706 wrote:
sabzdee wrote:Just took preptest 57 after a week off from studying.

LG: -5 (-4 on the third game which confused the hell out of me)
LR1: -2
LR2: -0
RC: -3

Score was 171. Pretty happy with these results. I want to really shape up my LG, which I think I'll have enough time to do before June. Looking to be in the 175 range, but given that this will be my first go I don't really know what to expect. Good luck to everyone!


Dinos


I was hoping it was one of the notoriously difficult ones... really hope nothing like that will be on ours. Yeesh.

User avatar
dardardelight
Posts: 99
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2013 6:17 pm

Re: The Official June 2014 Study Group

Postby dardardelight » Thu May 01, 2014 6:51 pm

I hate grad school so much. Can't Effing wait until my research papers are over.. which won't be until Sunday morning. I've taken pretty much a 2 week break from LSAT stuff and am really anxious to see if I've regressed, stayed the same, or if I even have a better, clearer mind going into the test.

It seems like it'll be a sprint to June 9th for me, as I'll be taking about 25 practice tests and reviewing them all with some drilling in between. Anyways, Let's Go Rangers! :mrgreen:

User avatar
dasani13
Posts: 1055
Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 3:21 pm

Re: The Official June 2014 Study Group

Postby dasani13 » Thu May 01, 2014 8:21 pm

unodostres wrote:Hi everyone. Been studying band haven't posted in this forum since feb. Hope everyone is doing well!


How's studying going?




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 34iplaw, lawcapture, mrgstephe, njames1961, theGrinch, Yahoo [Bot] and 5 guests