Top Law Schools

skip james wrote:

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

Ken wrote: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.

Woozy wrote: 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 wrote:

Woozy wrote: 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.

skip james wrote:

Woozy wrote: 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.

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

TheTopBloke wrote: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 wrote: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.

vivalalsat wrote:

allison34363 wrote: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.

abbas123 wrote:I'd like to know also - retaking is tough!

ljbc03 wrote: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!

Lyrrad wrote: 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.

Snuffie wrote:

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

r6_philly wrote:

allison34363 wrote:
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.

r6_philly wrote:

allison34363 wrote:
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.