The Official December 2015 Study Group Forum

appind · Post by **appind** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 1:09 pm

i came across a question in PT-C (PT-C.LR1.2) that i think has a mistake (as rare as that is..)

the conclusion is: I should stop drinking; only then I can ensure not getting cancer.
this translates to "Ensure no cancer" --> Stop drinking

the Q asks for a flaw in the argument.
E is the credited choice: "does not consider possibility of other causes of cancer."

but the conclusion is only saying that to ensure not getting cancer, i must not drink. One can still get cancer from other causes but to ensure that one doesn't get cancer, not drinking is a necessary condition.
the issue in the Q is that "only then" introduces the sufficient condition and so the TCR is not supported based on it.

anyone notice this issue?

flash21 · Post by **flash21** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 1:22 pm

appind wrote:i came across a question in PT-C (PT-C.LR1.2) that i think has a mistake (as rare as that is..)

the conclusion is: I should stop drinking; only then I can ensure not getting cancer.
this translates to "Ensure no cancer" --> Stop drinking

the Q asks for a flaw in the argument.
E is the credited choice: "does not consider possibility of other causes of cancer."

but the conclusion is only saying that to ensure not getting cancer, i must not drink. One can still get cancer from other causes but to ensure that one doesn't get cancer, not drinking is a necessary condition.
the issue in the Q is that "only then" introduces the sufficient condition and so the TCR is not supported based on it.

anyone notice this issue?

Pretty sure you are representing your conditional statement wrong.

I think it should be stop drinking --" ensure not get cancer

But you can get cancer in other ways

somethingElse · Post by **somethingElse** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 1:53 pm

Post removed...

Mint-Berry_Crunch · Post by **Mint-Berry_Crunch** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 3:14 pm

Post removed...

Mint-Berry_Crunch · Post by **Mint-Berry_Crunch** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 3:14 pm

Post removed...

TheProdigal · Post by **TheProdigal** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 3:34 pm

Sadly, LSAC (unsurprisingly) denied my fourth take petition. Best of luck to you all.

alpha kenny body · Post by **alpha kenny body** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 3:41 pm

TheProdigal wrote:Sadly, LSAC (unsurprisingly) denied my fourth take petition. Best of luck to you all.

Take it with me in February. You'll still be good for this year if you apply sometime before then.

SirArthurDayne · Post by **SirArthurDayne** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 3:45 pm

Post removed.

TheProdigal · Post by **TheProdigal** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 3:48 pm

fips tedora wrote:
TheProdigal wrote:Sadly, LSAC (unsurprisingly) denied my fourth take petition. Best of luck to you all.
Take it with me in February. You'll still be good for this year if you apply sometime before then.

Would love to, but I'm not eligible until October.

SirArthurDayne wrote:Very sorry to hear, but you still have a great score on your belt! Put the focus now on your application.

Yes, the "fun" part. Already hitting up student reps at my top choice.
ETA: And already hearing back. Woo!

flash21 · Post by **flash21** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 3:58 pm

Mint-Berry_Crunch wrote:Guys I got my favorite seat in the library, I'm so happy.

Also, PT21 S3 Q7 is a dumb question and I hate it.

So the three timed RC sections I've taken since I started studying have been -3,-0,-2. Yaayyyy I can read now.

Lol, I will still never get over how hard the final passage was for reading comp in october. I honestly thought it was one of the hardest RC passages I have done. glad to see you're doing well, though.

gamerish · Post by **gamerish** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 4:56 pm

Post removed...

SirArthurDayne · Post by **SirArthurDayne** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 4:59 pm

Post removed.

gamerish · Post by **gamerish** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 4:59 pm

Post removed...

dellara · Post by **dellara** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 5:05 pm

4 weeks out y'all. I'm challenging myself to medicate for 20 minutes every day leading up to the LSAT. Studies prove time and time again it improves test scores. Also I am limiting myself to only eating fish, (sometimes chicken if I must), fruits, veggies, nuts, and minimal whole wheat carbs. Also gonna take supplements to keep my immune system in tip top shape. One cheat meal (not day) a week.

Taking 3 prep tests a week on M, W, F. Weekends will be devoted to drilling. Scoring at low 170s right now. Goal score is a 177+

Let's do dis

dellara · Post by **dellara** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 5:09 pm

meditate***** not medicate lolz

chicharon · Post by **chicharon** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 5:11 pm

Post removed...

dellara · Post by **dellara** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 5:17 pm

chicharon-- I don't think it's a good or a bad thing, if you're speaking in terms of good for December test takers. We are all in the same cycle.

Good for october takers though, it seems, since they seem to be satisfied enough with their scores to warrant not retaking

boslaw56 · Post by **boslaw56** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 5:20 pm

Are you guys drilling full timed sections?

dellara · Post by **dellara** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 5:24 pm

boslaw56 wrote:Are you guys drilling full timed sections?

I drill by question type

dellara · Post by **dellara** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 5:27 pm

How do you guys go about inserting experimental into your PTs? What I have been doing for example, is using September 2007 as an experimental test in the sense that I use section 1 as the experimental for one PT, section 2 as the experimental to the next PT, and so on, and then when I'm done with the 4th PT I'll score September 2007. That way it incentivizes me to work as hard as the other sections of the test, since I will be ultimately scoring it.

It is, however, annoying to switch books mid-test. I wish the official tests would just include the experimental

boslaw56 · Post by **boslaw56** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 5:29 pm

Post Removed.

dellara · Post by **dellara** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 5:32 pm

boslaw56 wrote:
dellara wrote:
boslaw56 wrote:Are you guys drilling full timed sections?
I drill by question type
I'm doing that as well (Read Manhattan LR chapter -> drill type), but the questions I get wrong on my PTs seem to be fairly random.

I'm wondering if switching to timed sections from old PTs might help. I'm still barely finishing and maybe if I practice timing I'll be able to go back and review ones I wasn't 100% on.

That's one way, but assuming these old tests are ones you have already done, your timing will be a bit distorted since the questions will be familiar to you. Make sure you don't use it as a completely accurate reflection of your timing.

Are you blind reviewing before you score your PTs?

boslaw56 · Post by **boslaw56** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 5:37 pm

Post Removed.

gamerish · Post by **gamerish** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 5:45 pm

Post removed...

mist4bison · Post by **mist4bison** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 5:56 pm

Wow. I've been avoiding this thread out of shame and anger. Didn't realize how many retakers there are from October.

Checking in, but I'm probably going to avoid getting sucked into TLS. I feel alright for Dec, not nervous at all, just annoyed. Maybe that's a good sign?

Also, I think I'm going to change up how I study. Last take, I focused a lot on fundamentals--getting a type right--but not enough on timing. I'm probably only going to do PTs and timed sections from here on out. Hopefully this'll help! I think speeding through is what messed me up in Oct.