February 2017 LSAT Thread

[Rigo]

Drilled all 67 Main Conclusion / Main Point questions from PT's 1-39.
Only missed one q--a rinky dinky level two.
Overall pretty successful though. My instincts are good and I know how to parse the wording in the answer choices to find wrong answers.

Also did some easy ordering LG games. Piece of cake.

All in all, a successful first day.

[34iplaw]

Going to start going through this a bit again. Just did my first RC passage in some time. Starting easy and working my way through the Cambridge Packets...

Curious to thoughts on explanation for #1... actually switched to wrong answer doing it. Not sure why but want to make sure the understanding is correct. The fuller detail is for something else I'm doing.

PT 8 S3 P1
rDNA

[+] Spoiler

Paragraph 1 - introduction to general topic, where the discovery came from, why it's exciting
Paragraph 2 - continuation of paragraph 1, description of what rDNA technology is and what can be done with it

Paragraph 3 - (viewpoint 1) benefits stated by proponents; +find cures, +understand genetics' influence on development, +new drugs created by organisms created with rDNA technology
Paragraph 4 - (viewpoint 1) more benefits; +energy production and waste [sewage->power], +agriculture new crops resistant to possible detrimental effects

Paragraph 5 - (viewpoint 2) critics' concerns; -risks posed to environment cannot be determined, -cause uncurable diseases, -screw up food chain in microbiological systems, -could screw up entire ecosystems, -previous two points to their extreme could eradicate humanity
Paragraph 6 - (viewpoint 2) critic's concerns continued; -cross boundaries scientists shouldn't necessarily cross, -A Brave New World and humans designed to fit a specific role in society.

Notes: Author thinks BOTH SIDES are valid.

#1 - general/main point, what is the author trying to do with the passage [D]
A] tempted by this, but this misses out on the entirety of the critics' arguments which constitutes a major part of the passage
B] the author does not pick a side, and the author even gives critics some support in line 50 'another potentially serious problem'
C] like B, the author does not pick a side, and they are not advocating anything.
D] Correct... I wasn't a huge fan of the word controversy on this. That said, it does encapsulate the idea that there are proponents and critics of rDNA technology.
E] like B and C, the author does not pick a side.

#2 - detail/drawn from text, which of the following is true of research into genetic code. This idea shows up in the first paragraph...research in genetic code led to the discovery of rDNA technology. [A]
A] Correct... This is stated fairly explicitly in the passage in lines 1-7.
B] This sort of flips the actual relationship. This states that rDNA preceded research into genetic code.
C] We know that research into genetic code led to rDNA, but we don't know much else. Furthermore, we don't actually know what tangible benefits have been achieved by rDNA. This is all about supposed benefits/concerns.
D] We don't really know much about research into the genetic code of cells. rDNA definitely was not universally heralded.
E] Like D, we just don't know

#3 - detail/drawn from text, all of the following are mentioned in the passage as benefits of rDNA EXCEPT... [D]
A] Goes together with E... conversion of sewage to methane (lines 33-35)
B] organisms development would be new biological knowledge (lines 20-21)
C] all of the stuff about agriculture supports this... lines (35-38)
D] Correct. In the passage, we are told that this technology could be used to create organisms that eradicate disease, but we don't know anything about the cost of it all. Perhaps, this technology is super expensive, so it will only be used to combat the most serious diseases that are difficult to combat.
E] Goes together with A... conversion of sewage to methane (lines 33-35)

#4 - detail/inference, which of the following would most weaken one of the arguments of critics of rDNA... [A]
A] Correct. A large portion of the critics' argument (almost all of paragraph 5) is predicated on the idea that these organisms could escape from a lab. If they can't, who cares about anything mentioned in this paragraph. This seriously weakens their argument.
B] B, C, & D all suffer from one huge problem in my mind. They are all one specific case. A specific instance doesn't necessarily weaken a general argument like the one presented. With B, we also have no idea how much damage this organism did before it was contained or how easily it was contained. All this does is prove that these organisms can escape the lab.
C] This, like B & D, is about a specific case, and this A/C actually draws specific attention to this with the word 'particular.' We also don't really know much about this other than that it's population didn't explode. It could have still done irrevocable damage to ecosystems.
D] Again, like B & C, is about a specific case. Furthermore, this is a bit of an odd mix of the two contrasting viewpoints. This is about an organism that is being used (presumably) successfully to one of the proposed benefits put forth by proponents.
E] This would strengthen the proponents' argument by verifying their stance.

#5 - detail/inference, purpose of the bit about a Brave New World... [E] this bit of the passage is about the social issues and ethical conundrums that would be raised by extending rDNA methods from microbial organisms to humans (the critics aren't saying that it will be A Brave New World but certainly will bring us closer)
A] The critics only mention medical dangers in regards to incurable diseases (lines 45-48) which is a different part of the passage unrelated to the detail mentioned in #5.
B] This part of the passage is elaborating on the critics' concerns, so they are definitely not arguing in favor of rDNA technology being used on humans. This is the opposite of what we are looking for.
C] This is sort of some grandiose type statement, and it is pertinent to the 5th paragraph (and a huge component of the critics' argument) but not the detail in question.
D] This is wrong for a few reasons. Keep in mind that all benefits presented by proponents are purported and not actual while the critics' concerns are all hypothetical... all that is being said is that rDNA being used on humans could be a precursor for something like A Brave New World.
E] This is what we are looking for, but it is worded in a somewhat verbose and high level way. This part of the passage is about a possible eventuality and ethical concern raised by rDNA technology being used on humans. The passage is talking about humans being engineered to fulfill specific roles akin to a famous science fiction novel about the future (pretty much any book in this genre is a dystopia... one could argue there is no such thing as utopia.)

#6 - detail/inference, which of the following would strengthen one of the critics' arguments... [B]
A] no effect... this is concerning the proponents argument.
B] This strengthens much of the 5th paragraph, as it validates the concerns about the impact on the ecosystems in lines 47-55.
C] no effect... this is very much the same issue as with A...it's about the proponents' argument, and it doesn't even necessarily drastically damage it...perhaps these organisms are being used to treat diseases that cannot be cured with regular drugs.
D] no effect...could possibly weaken it, as it sort of diminishes the rarity and significance of an ecosystems' collapse... if they are constantly collapsing, is it really as big of a deal if one collapses?
E] no effect...could possibly weaken it, as it sort of diminishes the impact of an escape (who cares... it'll only last a few hours anyways)

Sidenote: selling something on eBay... guy gave me a ridiculous lowball, I went down $150...they went up $25. I went down another $100. They went up another $50. I raised the price back up another $75

Signed up for December, could possibly postpone... TBD...probably will if I can't change my test center.

[CMac86]

Curious, are you guys taking in February to get a jump start for 2018 admissions, or a late start for 2017 admissions?

Jump start for 2018.

Same. This is my last shot at it so I'm hoping to do well and have all my application materials ready to go when apps open in September.

What are you guys' dream schools? Mine's Michigan with Cornell being a close second.

Northwestern for me. I used to be close to a person or two that went there. The people that I met there had a wide range of backgrounds, from middle/high school music teachers through former Peace Corps volunteers. I loved living in Chicago (about 10 years there), and would love to end up practicing there.

[PrezRand]

My first day of study today too. Not focused but keep re-reading the same page over and over, and watching the same video over and over. It'll click soon I hope, lol.

Onward!

Curious, are you guys taking in February to get a jump start for 2018 admissions, or a late start for 2017 admissions?

Jump start for 2018. Gonna do my apps from March-June

Curious, are you guys taking in February to get a jump start for 2018 admissions, or a late start for 2017 admissions?

Jump start for 2018.

Same. This is my last shot at it so I'm hoping to do well and have all my application materials ready to go when apps open in September.

What are you guys' dream schools? Mine's Michigan with Cornell being a close second.

Stanford/Virginia then Texas. I really don't care about any other school. Maybe Duke or Chicago, but not really.

Drilled all 67 Main Conclusion / Main Point questions from PT's 1-39.
Only missed one q--a rinky dinky level two.
Overall pretty successful though. My instincts are good and I know how to parse the wording in the answer choices to find wrong answers.

Also did some easy ordering LG games. Piece of cake.

All in all, a successful first day.

Wow, that's a lot of reading.



Side-note: Since most of my books have not arrived, I am running out of work to do. I don't want to continue using the more recent tests yet. I guess I'll re-read the LR bible for now.

[Barry grandpapy]

.

[34iplaw]

Hey, does anybody know which forum I post in to find a study buddy?

Threads like this probably are a good place / with a respective test date.

[Barry grandpapy]

.

[RED&BLACK]

Hey, all! I'm writing in February as well, using 7sage at the moment; love it!

[LegallyBlackJD]

Curious, are you guys taking in February to get a jump start for 2018 admissions, or a late start for 2017 admissions?

Sorta late start for 2017 admissions. I have a viable score on record that I'm using to apply from Sept 2016. Going to sit for Feb in the hopes of getting more scholly offers. I don't plan to pay for law school

[Barack O'Drama]

Hey, all! I'm writing in February as well, using 7sage at the moment; love it!

7Sage is the shit!

[maybeman]

If anybody is interested in setting up a weekly study group for Feb., or if you live in the Tulsa area, then send me a PM.

Speaking of this, if anybody is looking to form an online study group to BR/go over hard questions/PT together/get more motivated PM me. Currently in the high 160's/low 170's shooting for mid 170s come feb.

[Rigo]

Did nothing yesterday. Going to get out of the house today so I can actually focus.

[Rigo]

Speaking of this, if anybody is looking to form an online study group to BR/go over hard questions/PT together/get more motivated PM me. Currently in the high 160's/low 170's shooting for mid 170s come feb.

I'd be down potentially if we can link schedules somewhat.

[Rigo]

Drilled Flaws today.

[PrezRand]

Got the books for PTs 7-38 today. Gonna do a logic game section and start breaking up the LR sections by question

[O.J.]

Using the online Blueprint program with videos, lessons and homework. It's been pretty stellar so far. Anyone else using it? Got through a few hour of LR today, feeling confident.

[PrezRand]

Currently drilling on Must Be True/Most Strongly Supported questions. I'm really struggling with them. Done 16 and I've missed 9 so far. Any tips?

[blackmamba8]

Decided to start drilling 5 games a day from the Cambridge packets and then watch their 7sage videos. I was going to do 5 of the same type each day, but I think doing 5 different types a day will help me get get better at transitioning from one type to another. I've struggled with that at times on full sections so I'm hoping this approach will help me improve.

[maybeman]

Speaking of this, if anybody is looking to form an online study group to BR/go over hard questions/PT together/get more motivated PM me. Currently in the high 160's/low 170's shooting for mid 170s come feb.

I'd be down potentially if we can link schedules somewhat.

I PT weekly and am very flexible with what test I take. We could BR?

[Barack O'Drama]

Using the online Blueprint program with videos, lessons and homework. It's been pretty stellar so far. Anyone else using it? Got through a few hour of LR today, feeling confident.

Damn! What is it like? I never really got anyone's personal opinion on blueprint!?

I'm really happy to hear you are liking it so far though

[Barack O'Drama]

Decided to start drilling 5 games a day from the Cambridge packets and then watch their 7sage videos. I was going to do 5 of the same type each day, but I think doing 5 different types a day will help me get get better at transitioning from one type to another. I've struggled with that at times on full sections so I'm hoping this approach will help me improve.

Nice! I did something similar which has helped me a lot!

[blackmamba8]

Decided to start drilling 5 games a day from the Cambridge packets and then watch their 7sage videos. I was going to do 5 of the same type each day, but I think doing 5 different types a day will help me get get better at transitioning from one type to another. I've struggled with that at times on full sections so I'm hoping this approach will help me improve.

Nice! I did something similar which has helped me a lot!

Did you bundle the games together as sections and give yourself a certain amount of time or would you time each game individually and review before moving on to the next one?

[blackmamba8]

Using the online Blueprint program with videos, lessons and homework. It's been pretty stellar so far. Anyone else using it? Got through a few hour of LR today, feeling confident.

I'm not using their online program but I did buy their reading comprehension book and I'm really enjoying it so far

[Barack O'Drama]

Decided to start drilling 5 games a day from the Cambridge packets and then watch their 7sage videos. I was going to do 5 of the same type each day, but I think doing 5 different types a day will help me get get better at transitioning from one type to another. I've struggled with that at times on full sections so I'm hoping this approach will help me improve.

Nice! I did something similar which has helped me a lot!

Did you bundle the games together as sections and give yourself a certain amount of time or would you time each game individually and review before moving on to the next one?

I just am working through the packets in order.

However, I am doing each section from 1-35 times and fool proofing them.

It seems to be working pretty well even if most of the games are repeats. Also, I just make sure I do them in the recommended amount of time that is listed in 7sage.

[Deardevil]

Currently drilling on Must Be True/Most Strongly Supported questions. I'm really struggling with them. Done 16 and I've missed 9 so far. Any tips?

Well, for MBT, you are looking for the one answer that can be proven based on the given stimulus.
Similarly, TCR for a MSS question has to be reasonably inferred from the text. For example...

Julia will dye her hair this afternoon and plans to be Harley Quinn for Halloween.

What must be true?
That Julia is dying her hair blonde? No. Maybe she is already blonde.
She is going to a party? Not necessarily. Maybe she is 10 and likes trick-or-treating.
How about if she desires to dress up? Well, yeah. MBT questions should be the easiest since four choices are more clearly wrong than others.

Raymond was spotted in front of the murdered victim's house.
He was wearing a brown hoodie and black gloves, matching the killer's description.

What is supported?
From this tiny piece of information,
I can hastily jump to one possible conclusion that Raymond is a suspect.
He might not actually be the murderer, but the available info suggests he might be involved.
Again, it is not 100% certain/true that Raymond is the guy we're looking for, but it is supported,
so I guess you can think of MSS questions as CBT questions, but you still have to isolate the one that is most strongly supported.