June 2011 Study Group Forum

[JG7773]

Yeah, I don't know that Logic "stud" is serious, but I was instantly wary when I read:

Joining the group. Excited for this. I'm pretty advanced, so feel free to ask many any questions you may have. And hopefully you can answer some of mine!


-LS

I guess it depends on the definition of 'advanced' but there seems to be some advice coming from him that flies in the face of LSAT common sense.

Is it sad that I ended up viewing his post as a flaw question?

[Eichörnchen]

Oh, and FYI to any studiers out there - I'm currently reviewing PT 18 and will be going through all the sections, so if anyone wants any extra practice, I can throw the Q I'm working on up on the board for anyone to do/discuss.

[Eichörnchen]

Yeah, I don't know that Logic "stud" is serious, but I was instantly wary when I read:

Joining the group. Excited for this. I'm pretty advanced, so feel free to ask many any questions you may have. And hopefully you can answer some of mine!


-LS

I guess it depends on the definition of 'advanced' but there seems to be some advice coming from him that flies in the face of LSAT common sense.

Is it sad that I ended up viewing his post as a flaw question?

In the general population? Yes. To us TLS'ers? No, that makes you cool I told my mom she had made an unwarranted assumption once without thinking. She replied with what she thought was a win, yet it was to much work for me to point out her flawed reasoning in her reply. It hurt my brain and I figured it's best to let it go in the real world sometimes so as to not alienate everyone around me hehe.

[Logic STUD]

I have seen Logic Stud's replies on many other boards, and it seems he is often trying to sow confusion and cause problems for people. Is there anyway we can have him banned from this board? Just go look at some of his other posts. Ridiculous. And I don't think we need any confusion being sown on a board of people trying to motivate each other for the studying of such an important test. Thoughts?

Thanks for welcoming me.


If you don't agree with something I write, feel free to address it like a mature adult or whatever just keep resorting to personal attacks.

[geverett]

*Deleted*

[99.9luft]

Guys, there are dozens of thousands of posters on this forum, and most of them (as it will be in LS) are not the kinds of people you would characterize as 'nice' and/or would want to befriend IRL. There are some that are, indeed, douches. If you don't like someone's post(s), just ignore and don't reply to them or reference them in your posts. Otherwise, you're either feeding the troll or stirring unnecessary conflict.

[geverett]

Sounds good. I would hate for someone to read some of his stuff, and have it confuse them though. oh well you are indeed right sir.

[Eichörnchen]

Geverett come in the rooms and use your formal logic skills on this LR question I don't get! Haha

[citykitty]

I accused my 5yo of making an argument based on an exclusion fallacy the other day. It was regarding cheddar cheese. I think maybe I'm studying a little too hard.

[Eichörnchen]

I accused my 5yo of making an argument based on an exclusion fallacy the other day. It was regarding cheddar cheese.

Everything about this is great

[geverett]

I accused my 5yo of making an argument based on an exclusion fallacy the other day. It was regarding cheddar cheese.

Everything about this is great

Love it!

I bought the Traciela Grouped by passage 1-20 and 21-40 books. I am starting to go through 1-20 today and slowly drawing out the "scale image" as taught by manhattan LSAT. This is my most erratic section so hopefully I can see some improvement here.

[Eichörnchen]

I accused my 5yo of making an argument based on an exclusion fallacy the other day. It was regarding cheddar cheese.

Everything about this is great

Love it!

I bought the Traciela Grouped by passage 1-20 and 21-40 books. I am starting to go through 1-20 today and slowly drawing out the "scale image" as taught by manhattan LSAT. This is my most erratic section so hopefully I can see some improvement here.

My RC has gone -9, -2, -6, -1 That -6 in there might be because halfway through it I saw that the copier had copied the pages all out of order and some were missing, so I had to pause it and dig out my original book, so that broke my concentration. So hopefully I'm not really all over the place, but if I am, maybe I will get those books too. Good luck with it! (And thanks again for the help with that LR; I have to learn to get mad LR diagramming skills for questions like that)

[aquyenl]

when you guys say you are meeting in the room, what room are you talking about? id like to join!

[Logic STUD]

I accused my 5yo of making an argument based on an exclusion fallacy the other day. It was regarding cheddar cheese.

Everything about this is great

Love it!

I bought the Traciela Grouped by passage 1-20 and 21-40 books. I am starting to go through 1-20 today and slowly drawing out the "scale image" as taught by manhattan LSAT. This is my most erratic section so hopefully I can see some improvement here.

Good luck!

[Eichörnchen]

when you guys say you are meeting in the room, what room are you talking about? id like to join!

If you look through the few more recent pages of the thread you will see how it work or who to pm .

[geverett]

When someone who has gone through the Manhattan RC guide gets a chance I would love for them to take a look at PT 19 RC Passage #4. The Manhattan guide is primarily concerned with constructing a "scale" around 2 opposing viewpoints whereas in this passage it seems that 3 viewpoints are given to where there could be a scale reflecting 3 different viewpoints. Perhaps I am looking at it wrong though. Thoughts?

[Manhattan LSAT Noah]

When someone who has gone through the Manhattan RC guide gets a chance I would love for them to take a look at PT 19 RC Passage #4. The Manhattan guide is primarily concerned with constructing a "scale" around 2 opposing viewpoints whereas in this passage it seems that 3 viewpoints are given to where there could be a scale reflecting 3 different viewpoints. Perhaps I am looking at it wrong though. Thoughts?

oh! That seems interesting! I'll try to steal away from other things tomorrow and take a look. While it doesn't sound like you're not doing this, keep in mind that the scale is to be used flexibly - some passages have only one side, (others - apparently - have 3!), but the real key is that the scale process keeps you reading actively.

One thing - does the author take a stand?

[un-vordox]

Hello everyone. There seems to be some dedicated studying going on here and I'm looking to get started, having just decided to take the June LSAT.

Last December I registered last minute for my first LSAT and only took 4 pretests with no instruction, listened to a couple free podcasts about how to approach it, and that was it. That said, I was somewhat satisfied with my score of 159. My biggest problem however was speed (I'm a slow reader), as I didn't finish any sections, and only got 13 questions done on the RC before frantically filling out random bubbles at the end. I think my normally strong LR carried me big time.

My question: For those of you that have worked on your speed specifically, what was the single most important thing you did? Any other ideas are also appreciated. Thanks!

[Logic STUD]

My question: For those of you that have worked on your speed specifically, what was the single most important thing you did? Any other ideas are also appreciated. Thanks!

Speed has been my biggest issue too. I find the time just so tight. I've gotten better though, the key for me is just not reading the full questions or passages. Like for an RC passage I'll just go right to the first question read it through and then look at the passage for key indicator words. I do the same thing with LR, when I figure out it's an assumption or flaw or whatever I find indicator words that match up between the answer and the passage.

Good luck!

[Neidermeyer519]

Speed oddly enough was never my issue; instead it was slowing down and carefully reading the stimulus and question stem and not picking an opposite answer, etc.

I made a 159 in December and since I worked mostly untimed and learned why I was missing certain questions and using the Powerscore bibles I corrected many of these mistakes. On my last two preptest I scored in the upper 160's and broke into the 170's for the first time today.

As for RC, I usually miss between 2-4 on the section, and what has worked for me has been just quickly reading the passages and picking out keywords. Initially I tried to read each passage in depth, but that is both unnecessary and very time consuming. I've been an avid reader my whole life though, so that definitely helps there. I've picked it up lately and it seems to be having a positive effect on my RC score.

[Ginj]

I've been working through PT 27 as a sort of exercise to gauge where I am after taking a four month hiatus. My main issue in the past has been timing on LG (usually missing between 1 and 3), answering too hastily in RC (missing around 4 or 5) and picking the shell game answer on the more difficult LR, which will usually put me at around -6 per LR section. I know that LG and RC can be corrected with effort, but that damn LR. My Atlas LR guide is arriving today...

...please help me, Atlas. Please.

Taking PT 53 this weekend, timed. Slightly frightened.

[geverett]

Man I just did some RC passage out of my Traciela Grouped by Passages book. I suck. I guess this one will be a long road just like my improvement in the other areas. No time to redeem myself today either as I have to go to work now. Oh well.

[jim-green]

Taking PT 53 this weekend, timed. Slightly frightened.

Isn't it early to take PT53, since there are only about 9 PTs left till PT62 after PT53? I was told we should take the last 10 after mid May. I am starting from PT29 now and hope to reach PT62 by June 4. Is this not right?

[Ginj]

I don't think we're all sticking to a definitive schedule...? Well, I'm not. I'm taking one test per week through April, two tests per week through May, splicing in February tests A, B and C. My last test will be on June 4th - the dreaded PT 62.

[maxpower430]

I've been working through PT 27 as a sort of exercise to gauge where I am after taking a four month hiatus. My main issue in the past has been timing on LG (usually missing between 1 and 3), answering too hastily in RC (missing around 4 or 5) and picking the shell game answer on the more difficult LR, which will usually put me at around -6 per LR section. I know that LG and RC can be corrected with effort, but that damn LR. My Atlas LR guide is arriving today...

...please help me, Atlas. Please.

Taking PT 53 this weekend, timed. Slightly frightened.

I'm only 2/3 of the way through the atlas guide but it has helped me immensely, their system is great and gets you thinking about how best to attack the questions, i can't recommend it enough. have you noticed a trend in your problem areas though? i.e. i used to miss a lot of assumption/flaw questions, so i worked on those and they are not nearly the problem area that they used to be, in large part thanks to the atlas guide.

also in terms of my confusion yesterday with the whole conditional logic thing, i understand where i was going wrong now, so i apologize if i was a source of confusion. basically i think i just need to get as comfortable as possible with conditional reasoning and realizing what the stimuli are saying, and then the conditional aspect of it becomes much clearer. i was for sure tripping myself up just relying on the indicator words and not really considering what they meant. does anyone else have some experience with this or anything they'd recommend? thanks