How I got a perfect score on the LSAT. Forum

[Woozy]

That is a good and detailed write-up. There is only one problem I saw which the author may wish to correct:

10. A greater proportion of high school students these days are lazy compared with earlier generations. Industriousness is both necessary and sufficient for academic success, and lazy students are never industrious.

Which of the following can be properly concluded, assuming the statements above are true:
(A) Blah blah blah
(B) Yada yada yada
(C) A greater proportion of high school students these days will find it impossible to succeed academically.
(D) A smaller proportion of students are industrious these days than in earlier generations.
(E) More high school students these days will not succeed in life.

Since this is question number 10 it’s still relatively easy, so we were able to quickly narrow the choices down to two. Yet, because it’s question 10, and we’re trying to finish the first ten in ten minutes, we’re moving quickly and may miss a key word or two. At first glance, D may actually appear more correct than C because its language isn’t as “strong” and it requires fewer logical steps, but I hope you noticed that D is talking about all students. C correctly limits itself to high school students.

The general point of this passage is useful, but it immediately struck me that C cannot be properly inferred from the stimulus. We don't know the incidence of industriousness among non-lazy students so we cannot conclude that the population as a whole has a lower incidence of industriousness. If the last sentence were changed to read that a student is not industrious if and only if he is lazy, this problem would be solved.

i don't think that actually solves the problem. i think there's a problem in the fact that 'being lazier compared to earlier generations' doesn't necessarily entail being 'a lazy student'.

here's a parallel argument where what im talking about may be more evident:

the majority of the lakers these days are worse at dunking than the lakers of earlier years. one can succeed academically if and only if they are industrious. people who are bad at dunking aren't industrious.

I don't see it that way. In his example, I read lazy as a binary condition. You are either lazy or not lazy. And a higher proportion of students are now lazy. I'd change your example to:

A higher percentage of the lakers these days are bad at dunking than the lakers of earlier years. One can succeed academically if and only if they are industrious. people who are bad at dunking aren't industrious.

[skip james]

I don't see it that way. In his example, I read lazy as a binary condition. You are either lazy or not lazy. And a higher proportion of students are now lazy. I'd change your example to:

A higher percentage of the lakers these days are bad at dunking than the lakers of earlier years. One can succeed academically if and only if they are industrious. people who are bad at dunking aren't industrious.

i just think there's a difference between these two sentences:

1) bob is bad at dunking
2) bob is bad at dunking compared to nick

in 1 the guy is bad at dunking. in 2 the guy is worse than someone else, which doesn't necessitate that bob is 'actually' bad at dunking, merely he can't be the best at it.

[Woozy]

I don't see it that way. In his example, I read lazy as a binary condition. You are either lazy or not lazy. And a higher proportion of students are now lazy. I'd change your example to:

A higher percentage of the lakers these days are bad at dunking than the lakers of earlier years. One can succeed academically if and only if they are industrious. people who are bad at dunking aren't industrious.

i just think there's a difference between these two sentences:

1) bob is bad at dunking
2) bob is bad at dunking compared to nick

in 1 the guy is bad at dunking. in 2 the guy is worse than someone else, which doesn't necessitate that bob is 'actually' bad at dunking, merely he can't be the best at it.

Of course there is a difference between your two sentences. However, we are talking about this sentence:

"A greater proportion of high school students these days are lazy compared with earlier generations."

I am saying "compared with" in this context is referring to the percentage of students with the quality of being lazy. It is not referring to the amount of laziness possessed by any student. I read it to mean: laziness is a yes/no question. when you compare the percentages of lazy students, the recent generation has a higher percent of "yes" than earlier generations. I do not read it to mean: when you compare students, an individual student from the recent generation would score higher on a laziness quotient test. If you read it the latter way, the "greater proportion" phrase has no purpose in the sentence.

Do you see the difference? It is not "students now are lazier." It is "more students now are lazy."

[skip james]

Ah... I see what you're saying.

[allison34363]

I don't see it that way. In his example, I read lazy as a binary condition. You are either lazy or not lazy. And a higher proportion of students are now lazy. I'd change your example to:

A higher percentage of the lakers these days are bad at dunking than the lakers of earlier years. One can succeed academically if and only if they are industrious. people who are bad at dunking aren't industrious.

i just think there's a difference between these two sentences:

1) bob is bad at dunking
2) bob is bad at dunking compared to nick

in 1 the guy is bad at dunking. in 2 the guy is worse than someone else, which doesn't necessitate that bob is 'actually' bad at dunking, merely he can't be the best at it.

I agree but what is your actual point?

[vivalalsat]

Someone mentioned the RC Bible being good. Can you elaborate?

[Kulax22]

Someone mentioned the RC Bible being good. Can you elaborate?

Dont think I mentioned that, but: it has a lot of RECENT RCs. Powerscore recycles the 2004 in a lot of material, and I think using the other recent years can hurt you because you'll want to see how you do on a blind-testing of the recent PTs.

[allison34363]

I liked the RC Bible... it just gives you a great breakdown of things to look for and identify when reading, especially the author's viewpoint.

[TheTopBloke]

Try this, it might help.

http://www.youtube.com/user/majorgeneraldave#p/u

If the link does not work, try searching for the majorgeneraldave channel

[allison34363]

Try this, it might help.

http://www.youtube.com/user/majorgeneraldave#p/u

If the link does not work, try searching for the majorgeneraldave channel

Cool videos... do you know his credentials though?

[vivalalsat]

I liked the RC Bible... it just gives you a great breakdown of things to look for and identify when reading, especially the author's viewpoint.

I could have told you that, lol.

[allison34363]

I liked the RC Bible... it just gives you a great breakdown of things to look for and identify when reading, especially the author's viewpoint.

I could have told you that, lol.

You can preview the book on Amazon if you want...

Actually it's not letting me do that anymore sorry.

[allison34363]

Waiting on the score, may be finally done with this lsat crap.

[ljbc03]

For those of you who went from a 170 to a higher score after retake,
what did you do when you ran out of materials after studying for the first time?

I assume some of you did most of the practice tests to prepare the best way possible for the 1st test. So what did you do upon studying for the retake?

I'm stuck at this hurdle. While logic reasoning i can go over and over and learn something new, the RC and logic games are easy once i've done them a few times, so repeating PTs seems like an inaccurate gauge of my abilities as I continue to study for retake. Pls help.

Thnx!

[abbas123]

I'd like to know also - retaking is tough!

[abbas123]

anyone?

[Shrimps]

I'd like to know also - retaking is tough!

ljbc03 took this question to a separate thread. I suggested using the RC and LR portions of the GMAT test - they're pretty similar to LSAT. And I personally am trying to find any puzzle books that have puzzles similar to LSAT logic games that I could practice on.

[abbas123]

ah ok thanks ill look into that

[allison34363]

For those of you who went from a 170 to a higher score after retake,
what did you do when you ran out of materials after studying for the first time?

I assume some of you did most of the practice tests to prepare the best way possible for the 1st test. So what did you do upon studying for the retake?

I'm stuck at this hurdle. While logic reasoning i can go over and over and learn something new, the RC and logic games are easy once i've done them a few times, so repeating PTs seems like an inaccurate gauge of my abilities as I continue to study for retake. Pls help.

Thnx!

You used EVERY preptest out there? I highly doubt this.

[Snuffie]

That said, there is a large element of luck involved in getting that high score. But if you are able to be relaxed during the test, and practice well you might be surprised at how well you can do.

What advice do you offer where relaxation and/or sleeping the night before the test are concerned? These are absolutely killing me during administrations.

[allison34363]

That said, there is a large element of luck involved in getting that high score. But if you are able to be relaxed during the test, and practice well you might be surprised at how well you can do.

What advice do you offer where relaxation and/or sleeping the night before the test are concerned? These are absolutely killing me during administrations.

Ambien and chamomile tea!

[r6_philly]

I thought sleeping aids limit REM sleep therefore actually obstruct your brain from consolidating daily intake of short term memories into long term memories (or discarding them)? I thought sleeping aids help you physically rest and regenerate but actually makes your brain more fatigued and disorganized (from the lack of REM sleep)?

[r6_philly]

You used EVERY preptest out there? I highly doubt this.

I used every preptest before my first take this weekend. There are not THAT many of them.

[allison34363]

You used EVERY preptest out there? I highly doubt this.

I used every preptest before my first take this weekend. There are not THAT many of them.

Redo them.

[vivalalsat]

You used EVERY preptest out there? I highly doubt this.

I used every preptest before my first take this weekend. There are not THAT many of them.

What was your score on these tests? Taking preptests is a good indicator of how you will perform on test day, so unless you royally screwed things up on test day, you should have known you would not score well.