Top Law Schools

Dirigo wrote:

WorldsCollide wrote:What are some tips you all have for RC and prepping for that?

Prayer....and practice....and prayer.

Jgoods wrote:guh, I just did a LG game and got it all right... my problem? probably took way longer than it should(didn't time it, yes i realize thats stupid) I have the problem of figuring a lot of the problems out without doing much more than the initial diagram and then diagram the questions in my head... but I feel like I'm going so slow when i do that but I just start doing it without even thinking

I scan the answer choices to see if I luck out and my initial inferences in setting the game up yield an answer.
Most times, I rely on writing out mini game boards. Avoid relying on working things out in your head too much. Mini game boards, just like the initial setup, can be relied upon for future questions--especially list questions ("which is a complete and accurate list of...").
Whenever a mini game board is a possible (or valid) world, I put a checkmark next to it. If it's not a possible world, I put an X through it so I don't make the mistake of referring back to it later and forgetting it's impossible.

Dirigo wrote:

WorldsCollide wrote:What are some tips you all have for RC and prepping for that?

Prayer....and practice....and prayer.

Dirigo wrote:

WorldsCollide wrote:

Dirigo wrote:

WorldsCollide wrote:What are some tips you all have for RC and prepping for that?

Prayer....and practice....and prayer.

But I'm an atheist ;(

I love LG! But I'm still not doing them fast enough. Definitely what I'll be working on for December!

I'm not religious at all, FYI. I guess I mean to say that my RC strategy unfortunately consists of "hoping for the best" as of now.

Dirigo wrote:

Jgoods wrote:

Dirigo wrote: I scan the answer choices to see if I luck out and my initial inferences in setting the game up yield an answer.
Most times, I rely on writing out mini game boards. Avoid relying on working things out in your head too much. Mini game boards, just like the initial setup, can be relied upon for future questions--especially list questions ("which is a complete and accurate list of...").
Whenever a mini game board is a possible (or valid) world, I put a checkmark next to it. If it's not a possible world, I put an X through it so I don't make the mistake of referring back to it later and forgetting it's impossible.

Def makes sense, and I'm doing a few complex order games (or trying to, its my sister's bday so some of our friends are over) and there doesn't seem to be many inferences in them to have a filed out initial diagram

There are definitely many games that are question/rule-driven--where there are a lot of rules and they don't really seem to link up.
If that's the case, move to tackle the questions rather than sitting there trying to see inferences when there may not be any to see. Games like this rely mostly on brute force in going through the questions and testing out each answer choice.
As you practice, your intuition will be perfected and you'll know if it's an inference-driven game versus a questions/rule-driven game. I definitely suggest you look always look for inferences since you're just starting out drilling. I'd estimate that 80+% of games can be unlocked by making big inferences--brute force in these cases would spend valuable time.

Jgoods wrote:I feel like this is going to be a great thread people, it's far off but eventual we are going to be the only thing we do besides studying (how it was being about to take the Sept test) and I see potential, keep up the studying

WorldsCollide wrote:
I wish this was all I needed to do! Damn you 19 credits and actually beginning my application process!

Are y'all applying this cycle?

jrdavila09 wrote:Apply to this cycle!

Question guys, can someone explain to me why A is the correct answer for Q13 S3 PT21 or necessary assumption question #3 in the cambridge LR booklet. I can really see why B is correct as well!

jrdavila09 wrote:Yeah I just did check Manhattan, I still don't get it. I need something in layman's terms.

Jgoods wrote:

Jgoods wrote:

jrdavila09 wrote:Yeah I just did check Manhattan, I still don't get it. I need something in layman's terms.

aight Looks like I haven't done it yet lol gimme a minute and ill see what i can conjure up

Perfect, I got it right lol, alright so what weakens the argument? Well to start off, the argument is that because the 8in netwonian telescope has a fuzzy image, the exodus should be chosen... But so what? just because it is a little more fuzzy doesn't mean it should be chosen. Maybe you need a computer program that is expensive and complicated(yeah a bad ex but I'm trying lol) so you should look at more than just the image quality but the products as a whole instead of just one aspect of it... make sense?

edt:which AC did u pick?
edt2: ya manhattan wasn't very good on that one, hope I helped there

jrdavila09 wrote:

Jgoods wrote:

Jgoods wrote:

jrdavila09 wrote:Yeah I just did check Manhattan, I still don't get it. I need something in layman's terms.

aight Looks like I haven't done it yet lol gimme a minute and ill see what i can conjure up

I think you did the wrong question. PT 21 S3 Q13. Its a NA question.

Dirigo wrote:

jrdavila09 wrote:Yeah I just did check Manhattan, I still don't get it. I need something in layman's terms.

It really comes down to the symptoms of lead poisoning.
Premise: People who have lead poisoning see bright haloes around light sources.
Premise: Van Gough painted haloes around the stars and sun in his paintings.
Conclusion: Van Gough had led poisoning.

(A) is necessary because it it lets us know that Van Gough painted some things as he saw them. Apply the negation test: Van Gough NEVER painted things as he saw them. The negation kills the argument because if he saw haloes, he wouldn't paint haloes. And the haloes are the only thing that supports the conclusion of Van Gough having lead poisoning.

(B) is not necessary. We don't need to know that he continued ingesting lead, let alone use lead-based paint. Maybe when it comes to lead poisoning, it only takes one exposure and you see haloes for life. Applying the negation test (Van Gough did not continue to use paints containing lead) does not destroy the argument. In fact, the premise that Naples Yellow paint contained lead isn't even needed for this argument.

Hope that helped.

Jgoods wrote:also which LR packet? all of my cambridge stuff is broken down into types (NA, SA, must be true, etc.)

nlee10 wrote:

Jgoods wrote:also which LR packet? all of my cambridge stuff is broken down into types (NA, SA, must be true, etc.)

I believe it is the Cambridge PT 1-38 LR Packets by Question Type.