The Official September 2014 Study Group Forum

schmelling · Post by **schmelling** » Tue Sep 09, 2014 6:46 pm

Post removed.

Hand · Post by **Hand** » Tue Sep 09, 2014 6:49 pm

schmelling wrote:Looks like I'm taking a break- just put Pot of chili on the stove and cracked an IPA

attaboy

ilikebaseball · Post by **ilikebaseball** » Tue Sep 09, 2014 6:54 pm

PT 46 seems to have REALLY hard RC. The games are easy, the LR is average to below average, but the RC is really difficult. Especially the freakin coordination of laws passage. The prosperity one was hard too. I understood it fine, but the questions seemed hard. But the coordination one I couldnt tell you one damn thing

Colonel_funkadunk · Post by **Colonel_funkadunk** » Tue Sep 09, 2014 6:55 pm

ilikebaseball wrote:PT 46 seems to have REALLY hard RC. The games are easy, the LR is average to below average, but the RC is really difficult. Especially the freakin coordination of laws passage. The prosperity one was hard too. I understood it fine, but the questions seemed hard. But the coordination one I couldnt tell you one damn thing

That was my first PT, did worse on RC than anything.

sfoglia · Post by **sfoglia** » Tue Sep 09, 2014 7:00 pm

Colonel_funkadunk wrote:
sfoglia wrote:WHAT. THE. FUCK.

I just got 4/6 of the questions on an RC passage incorrect. This has never happened to me before. I double-checked to make sure there wasn't some sort of bubbling error... I don't understand. I have never gotten this low of a score on RC.

This is fucking horrifying. I'm going to go cry outside and smoke a cigarette.

Back into the 160s I go.
I fucked that RC section up to, just one passage in particular especially .

You'll be cool

What kind of cig

Was it that stupid comparative on blackmail?

Marlboro. Dull my feelings.

BillPackets wrote:
Did u do 65?

Yes, I hate it. Destroyer of dreams.

I want to sit for the September test so badly!

ETA: Bill, I went -2 on both LR sections and the experimental I added.

I've spent the past two days reviewing RC and LG only, and those were the sections that dicked me.

BillPackets · Post by **BillPackets** » Tue Sep 09, 2014 7:03 pm

Ohhhh fuaaaaarrrrrrrk the blackmail passage gawd those Qs were freakin ridic!!!!!!

hetookmetoamovie · Post by **hetookmetoamovie** » Tue Sep 09, 2014 7:05 pm

First -0 on RC ever for me in PT64! Unfortunately, this victory was offset by a -9 combined in LR. Maybe I just can't be taught how to logically reason/circle the right answer. Still happy about the 172

sfoglia · Post by **sfoglia** » Tue Sep 09, 2014 7:12 pm

hetookmetoamovie wrote:First -0 on RC ever for me in PT64! Unfortunately, this victory was offset by a -9 combined in LR. Maybe I just can't be taught how to logically reason/circle the right answer. Still happy about the 172

OMG that's so great! Congratulations!! I knew you'd do fantastic.

Colonel_funkadunk · Post by **Colonel_funkadunk** » Tue Sep 09, 2014 7:15 pm

sfoglia wrote:
Colonel_funkadunk wrote:
sfoglia wrote:WHAT. THE. FUCK.

I just got 4/6 of the questions on an RC passage incorrect. This has never happened to me before. I double-checked to make sure there wasn't some sort of bubbling error... I don't understand. I have never gotten this low of a score on RC.

This is fucking horrifying. I'm going to go cry outside and smoke a cigarette.

Back into the 160s I go.
I fucked that RC section up to, just one passage in particular especially .

You'll be cool

What kind of cig
Was it that stupid comparative on blackmail?

Marlboro. Dull my feelings.

BillPackets wrote:
Did u do 65?
Yes, I hate it. Destroyer of dreams.

I want to sit for the September test so badly!

ETA: Bill, I went -2 on both LR sections and the experimental I added. I've spent the past two days reviewing RC and LG only, and those were the sections that dicked me.

Yea the blackmail section sucked major D

Colonel_funkadunk · Post by **Colonel_funkadunk** » Tue Sep 09, 2014 7:15 pm

hetookmetoamovie wrote:First -0 on RC ever for me in PT64! Unfortunately, this victory was offset by a -9 combined in LR. Maybe I just can't be taught how to logically reason/circle the right answer. Still happy about the 172

That's what's up MOVIE

sfoglia · Post by **sfoglia** » Tue Sep 09, 2014 7:21 pm

Colonel_funkadunk wrote: Yea the blackmail section sucked major D

All level 4s and 5s according to LSATQA.

I was going to just do every LG that every existed and keep studying LR and RC leisurely, but now I'm going to do every LG that ever existed and every single difficult RC I can possibly get my hands on, too.

The only problem is that if I still don't end up sitting for the September test, I'll have burned through a lot of study material...

BillPackets · Post by **BillPackets** » Tue Sep 09, 2014 7:23 pm

hetookmetoamovie wrote:First -0 on RC ever for me in PT64! Unfortunately, this victory was offset by a -9 combined in LR. Maybe I just can't be taught how to logically reason/circle the right answer. Still happy about the 172

That's what's up that's pretty much exactly what I did this weekend but guessin u went -0 on lg n I made 1 dumb mistake Idk I don't think it's a bad distribution

hetookmetoamovie · Post by **hetookmetoamovie** » Tue Sep 09, 2014 7:46 pm

Thanks, sfoglia! Thanks, Colonel!

I swear, this test is an emotional rollercoaster from hell.

BillPackets wrote:
hetookmetoamovie wrote:First -0 on RC ever for me in PT64! Unfortunately, this victory was offset by a -9 combined in LR. Maybe I just can't be taught how to logically reason/circle the right answer. Still happy about the 172
That's what's up that's pretty much exactly what I did this weekend but guessin u went -0 on lg n I made 1 dumb mistake Idk I don't think it's a bad distribution

Yeah! I merrily started on Game #1 having misread the rules, so when I realized that, I got super paranoid about all of the other games.

For once I didn't miss any LsatQA level 1 questions, which makes me feel like maybe I'm building up some more endurance and not just making (as many) stupid mistakes. I missed mostly Strengthen/Weaken questions with a few Role/MSS/MBTs thrown in there for good measure.

santoki · Post by **santoki** » Tue Sep 09, 2014 7:49 pm

getting tripped up negating answer choices sometimes...can you guys give me your negations of the following?

1. no business can survive without changing its core corporate philosophy.
2. a business cannot change its core corporate philosophy without becoming a different corporation.

what are the general guidelines for these choices with multiple things that can be negated? thanks a bunch

Colonel_funkadunk · Post by **Colonel_funkadunk** » Tue Sep 09, 2014 7:55 pm

santoki wrote:getting tripped up negating answer choices sometimes...can you guys give me your negations of the following?

1. no business can survive without changing its core corporate philosophy.
2. a business cannot change its core corporate philosophy without becoming a different corporation.

what are the general guidelines for these choices with multiple things that can be negated? thanks a bunch

Take your on topics back to the December thread

Just kidding, but te person who responded in there had the proper negations if I remember correctly, in number one change no business to some business and in number two u can change cannot to can

schmelling · Post by **schmelling** » Tue Sep 09, 2014 7:57 pm

Post removed.

santoki · Post by **santoki** » Tue Sep 09, 2014 8:02 pm

schmelling wrote:
santoki wrote:getting tripped up negating answer choices sometimes...can you guys give me your negations of the following?

1. no business can survive without changing its core corporate philosophy.
2. a business cannot change its core corporate philosophy without becoming a different corporation.

what are the general guidelines for these choices with multiple things that can be negated? thanks a bunch
1) a business might survive even if it does not change its core corporate philosophy
2) a business might change its core corporate philosophy even without becoming a different corporation

you negate a sufficient/necessary statement by showing that the sufficient condition does absolutely require the necessary. Basically, you show the sufficient can exist without the necessary.

Take the following example:

If you wanted to convince me that all apples are red, you would show me a red apple and say something like this:

"If an object is not red it cannot be an apple"

And I would respond by pulling out a green apple and responding:

"Even if an object is not red, it might still be an apple."

Thus negating your statement.

Hope this helps.

thank you, september frenemies. i was once a part of you but have since become the departed.

(appreciate the insight!)

BillPackets · Post by **BillPackets** » Tue Sep 09, 2014 8:41 pm

santoki wrote:getting tripped up negating answer choices sometimes...can you guys give me your negations of the following?

1. no business can survive without changing its core corporate philosophy.
2. a business cannot change its core corporate philosophy without becoming a different corporation.

what are the general guidelines for these choices with multiple things that can be negated? thanks a bunch

Also duder when u really start understanding what negating means you'll b able to throw "it is not the case that..." On the beginning of any sentence and understand how that negates it

MEAhrnsbrak · Post by **MEAhrnsbrak** » Tue Sep 09, 2014 8:44 pm

sfoglia wrote:
Colonel_funkadunk wrote: I was going to just do every LG that every existed and keep studying LR and RC leisurely, but now I'm going to do every LG that ever existed and every single difficult RC I can possibly get my hands on, too.

Have you tried the Cambridge packet of difficult passages? I started using those and they helped immensely.

Colonel_funkadunk · Post by **Colonel_funkadunk** » Tue Sep 09, 2014 8:47 pm

MEAhrnsbrak wrote:
sfoglia wrote:
Colonel_funkadunk wrote: I was going to just do every LG that every existed and keep studying LR and RC leisurely, but now I'm going to do every LG that ever existed and every single difficult RC I can possibly get my hands on, too.
Have you tried the Cambridge packet of difficult passages? I started using those and they helped immensely.

Whoa whoa whoa I never said that

BillPackets · Post by **BillPackets** » Tue Sep 09, 2014 8:50 pm

Colonel_funkadunk wrote:
MEAhrnsbrak wrote:
sfoglia wrote:
Colonel_funkadunk wrote: I was going to just do every LG that every existed and keep studying LR and RC leisurely, but now I'm going to do every LG that ever existed and every single difficult RC I can possibly get my hands on, too.
Have you tried the Cambridge packet of difficult passages? I started using those and they helped immensely.
Whoa whoa whoa I never said that

Quoting faux pax it's ok we welcome all n grey usually the 1 who explains to ppl how to quote/embed/use all those functions

MEAhrnsbrak · Post by **MEAhrnsbrak** » Tue Sep 09, 2014 8:57 pm

Sorry that's what happens when you type on your ipad while letting the dog out! Clearly wasn't paying attention to the text I was cutting out!

sfoglia · Post by **sfoglia** » Tue Sep 09, 2014 8:57 pm

MEAhrnsbrak wrote:
sfoglia wrote:
Colonel_funkadunk wrote: I was going to just do every LG that every existed and keep studying LR and RC leisurely, but now I'm going to do every LG that ever existed and every single difficult RC I can possibly get my hands on, too.
Have you tried the Cambridge packet of difficult passages? I started using those and they helped immensely.

Just started those today. I did five and only went -1 on two of them. How long did those take you? I'm hit 14 minutes on one of them!

sfoglia · Post by **sfoglia** » Tue Sep 09, 2014 8:59 pm

Colonel_funkadunk wrote:
MEAhrnsbrak wrote:
sfoglia wrote:
Colonel_funkadunk wrote: I was going to just do every LG that every existed and keep studying LR and RC leisurely, but now I'm going to do every LG that ever existed and every single difficult RC I can possibly get my hands on, too. Every morning I flex my biceps in the mirror and say, "LSAC I am coming for you," in my meanest voice.[/s]
Have you tried the Cambridge packet of difficult passages? I started using those and they helped immensely.
Whoa whoa whoa I never said that

Gosh, that's so embarrassing for you, to have her quote you saying that.

ETA: Or he. Sorry, MEA. Not sure your gender.

MEAhrnsbrak · Post by **MEAhrnsbrak** » Tue Sep 09, 2014 9:12 pm

sfoglia wrote:
MEAhrnsbrak wrote:
sfoglia wrote:
Colonel_funkadunk wrote: I was going to just do every LG that every existed and keep studying LR and RC leisurely, but now I'm going to do every LG that ever existed and every single difficult RC I can possibly get my hands on, too.
Have you tried the Cambridge packet of difficult passages? I started using those and they helped immensely.
Just started those today. I did five and only went -1 on two of them. How long did those take you? I'm hit 14 minutes on one of them!

Honestly, I didn't time them at first, because my issues have always been with my comprehension not my speed. But I would say they easily took me 14-15 minutes in the beginning.