The Official October 2015 Study Group Forum

ffamran · Post by **ffamran** » Mon Aug 17, 2015 9:45 pm

Ahhhhhh I just registered

It's real it's happening

and i had to pick a further testing location because i'm dumb and registered so late

MrBalloons · Post by **MrBalloons** » Mon Aug 17, 2015 9:59 pm

Does anybody have a solid strategy for advanced method questions? Level 1 and 2 questions just come naturally, but level 3 and 4 trip me up too often.

seashellstandard · Post by **seashellstandard** » Mon Aug 17, 2015 9:59 pm

Just realized I am not good at 'weaken' question types, so going through the LG bible right now. Loosing all my friends because I am studying so much, life is rough : ( (

ltowns1 · Post by **ltowns1** » Mon Aug 17, 2015 10:17 pm

seashellstandard wrote:Just realized I am not good at 'weaken' question types, so going through the LG bible right now. Loosing all my friends because I am studying so much, life is rough : ( (

It will all be worth it when you get that score

ariaaaa · Post by **ariaaaa** » Mon Aug 17, 2015 10:25 pm

seashellstandard wrote:Just realized I am not good at 'weaken' question types, so going through the LG bible right now. Loosing all my friends because I am studying so much, life is rough : ( (

^ retweet.

praise that one of my roommates is also studying for the lsat so i guess i actually see people every once in a while

somethingElse · Post by **somethingElse** » Tue Aug 18, 2015 12:14 am

Post removed...

pterodactyls · Post by **pterodactyls** » Tue Aug 18, 2015 12:39 am

I hate RC.

Tried to do a timed section tonight. Got through the first passage and questions, felt like I did well and got them all correct, looked at my watch and I'm at 10 mins. Freaked out that I was running behind and rushed through next passage without comprehending it at all. Got to the questions and didn't know how to answer any of them. Threw book.

RZ5646 · Post by **RZ5646** » Tue Aug 18, 2015 12:52 am

MrBalloons wrote:Does anybody have a solid strategy for advanced method questions? Level 1 and 2 questions just come naturally, but level 3 and 4 trip me up too often.

Let me know if you find out, because I hate these. I feel like they're basically disguised mini RC questions that infiltrate LR sections to ruin my day.

somethingElse · Post by **somethingElse** » Tue Aug 18, 2015 1:14 am

Post removed...

kbrizz · Post by **kbrizz** » Tue Aug 18, 2015 1:24 am

Anyone have tips for using a digital copy of a test and blind reviewing? Seems like it wouldn't be an issue but who knows...

ltowns1 · Post by **ltowns1** » Tue Aug 18, 2015 8:04 am

somethingelse55 wrote:
ltowns1 wrote:
somethingelse55 wrote:Gotcha. Surprised there hasn't been one like that before.

BTW, speaking of sufficient questions...You guys mind helping me out with this one? Its PT 45, Section 4, Q22. I'm thinking this might be a similar situation to what you typed up, Mint, but I could be wrong.

Basically it ends up diagramming like this (I'll put it in A and B form and simplify it to be more relevant)

P1: ~B -> ~A
P2: Most C -> ~D
C: Most C -> ~A

So TCR is ~D -> ~B. I completely understand that, since ~B gives you ~A. However, let's say that one of the answer choices skipped that step and was instead, ~D -> ~A. Would that also be a sufficient assumption? It seems like it combines with P2 to give you the same conclusion, even though it ignores P1. Is this a fault of mine to disregard that premise and a situation just like what you typed up, Mint?

Wait a minute, why isn't the TCR -B-->-D? I haven't see this question, but in this case shouldn't the sufficient condition be -B because it is apart of the first premise, which leads to the second premise, where -D is stated?
Well here's how the statements combine:

If you plug in TCR, ~D -> ~B, you have this:

Most C -> ~D
~D -> ~B

If you have a most statement and an 'all' statement, you can combine them to form another most statement if the left side of the 'all' statement and the right side of the most statement are the same proposition. If that's the case (which it is here), then you just transitive property the other two, which gives you Most C -> ~B. Then from there, we already have up in premise one that ~B -> ~A, and so you can deduce the conclusion.

What I was asking though, is that if you plug in ~D -> ~A, then you essentially skip that second step from going to ~B -> ~A; you only have to do that first step with combining the most and the all:

Most C -> ~D
~D -> ~A

Gives you the conclusion as well...At this point I think I'm correct that that would be another credited response were it to show up, but I'm not 100% on that...It just seems odd to not have to utilize the first premise directly. Maybe it works in the diagram sense but not in the wording sense?

Oh ok, i thought u were referencing the actual question in that conditional, thanks for explaining. Hey guys, where are all the LSAT experts, it seems like they have gone underground? Lol maybe this is what happens near test time I don't know.

Mint-Berry_Crunch · Post by **Mint-Berry_Crunch** » Tue Aug 18, 2015 12:06 pm

Post removed...

mist4bison · Post by **mist4bison** » Tue Aug 18, 2015 12:29 pm

Has anyone used Hacking the LSAT Explanations? I just ordered the book for PTs 67-71.

Mint-Berry_Crunch · Post by **Mint-Berry_Crunch** » Tue Aug 18, 2015 12:43 pm

Post removed...

MrBalloons · Post by **MrBalloons** » Tue Aug 18, 2015 3:12 pm

Went 174 on PT 60.

LR1: -1
LG: -3
LR2: -2
RC: -1

My new personal best. Today is a good day.

ariaaaa · Post by **ariaaaa** » Tue Aug 18, 2015 3:24 pm

MrBalloons wrote:Went 174 on PT 60.

LR1: -1
LG: -3
LR2: -2
RC: -1

My new personal best. Today is a good day.

nice!

MrBalloons · Post by **MrBalloons** » Tue Aug 18, 2015 4:59 pm

MrBalloons wrote:Went 174 on PT 60.

LR1: -1
LG: -3
LR2: -2
RC: -1

My new personal best. Today is a good day.

I forgot to add that I BR'd it at a 177. Which is equally good news for me.

PoopNpants · Post by **PoopNpants** » Tue Aug 18, 2015 5:26 pm

Anyone got a good method tough parallel flaw Qs?

kbrizz · Post by **kbrizz** » Tue Aug 18, 2015 5:50 pm

PTed for the first time in a little while. Surprised to see that I had 5 minutes to spare on both LR and RC. I'm sure that will be negatively reflected in the score, but we will see after BR. Feels way better than my last test, though I clearly need to work on endurance.

kbrizz · Post by **kbrizz** » Tue Aug 18, 2015 5:50 pm

MrBalloons wrote:Went 174 on PT 60.

LR1: -1
LG: -3
LR2: -2
RC: -1

My new personal best. Today is a good day.

Congrats! Now let's switch places.

MrBalloons · Post by **MrBalloons** » Tue Aug 18, 2015 6:05 pm

PoopNpants wrote:Anyone got a good method tough parallel flaw Qs?

I always mark up my questions directly. Change all premises and conclusion to A's, B's, C's, etc. I write the letters right over top of the phrase.

Then I look through the answer choices and knock out any obviously wrong ones. Ones that result in a "this OR this" conclusion when the original only results in a "this" conclusion (if that makes sense) among other clear differences. This usually leaves 2 or 3 choices. I quickly diagram them the same way I did the question stem, writing A's, Bc's, and C's on top of the premises and conclusion.

The one that has the same configuration of A's, B's, and C's is the right answer. As long as I'm clear about logic rules and watch out for "if" placements (sometimes things are phrased as "If A then B" and then the answer choice is "B, if A," and you have to be aware that they're the same thing) I pretty much always come up with the correct response in reasonable time.

MrBalloons · Post by **MrBalloons** » Tue Aug 18, 2015 6:07 pm

kbrizz wrote:Surprised to see that I had 5 minutes to spare on RC.

That's pretty rare. Nice. If you can do that consistently, you'll get RC mastered.

PoopNpants · Post by **PoopNpants** » Tue Aug 18, 2015 6:41 pm

MrBalloons wrote:
PoopNpants wrote:Anyone got a good method tough parallel flaw Qs?
I always mark up my questions directly. Change all premises and conclusion to A's, B's, C's, etc. I write the letters right over top of the phrase.

Then I look through the answer choices and knock out any obviously wrong ones. Ones that result in a "this OR this" conclusion when the original only results in a "this" conclusion (if that makes sense) among other clear differences. This usually leaves 2 or 3 choices. I quickly diagram them the same way I did the question stem, writing A's, Bc's, and C's on top of the premises and conclusion.

The one that has the same configuration of A's, B's, and C's is the right answer. As long as I'm clear about logic rules and watch out for "if" placements (sometimes things are phrased as "If A then B" and then the answer choice is "B, if A," and you have to be aware that they're the same thing) I pretty much always come up with the correct response in reasonable time.

Word thanks for the advice, I'll give that a try. For LR i don't really do any diagramming at all, I usually get through formal logic in arguments by applying ACs to the argument mentally. I usually just try to eliminate ACs rather than find one that fits, and then apply whatever remaining contenders and see if it matches.

Mint-Berry_Crunch · Post by **Mint-Berry_Crunch** » Tue Aug 18, 2015 7:10 pm

Post removed...

MrBalloons · Post by **MrBalloons** » Tue Aug 18, 2015 7:13 pm

PoopNpants wrote:
MrBalloons wrote:
PoopNpants wrote:Anyone got a good method tough parallel flaw Qs?
I always mark up my questions directly. Change all premises and conclusion to A's, B's, C's, etc. I write the letters right over top of the phrase.

Then I look through the answer choices and knock out any obviously wrong ones. Ones that result in a "this OR this" conclusion when the original only results in a "this" conclusion (if that makes sense) among other clear differences. This usually leaves 2 or 3 choices. I quickly diagram them the same way I did the question stem, writing A's, Bc's, and C's on top of the premises and conclusion.

The one that has the same configuration of A's, B's, and C's is the right answer. As long as I'm clear about logic rules and watch out for "if" placements (sometimes things are phrased as "If A then B" and then the answer choice is "B, if A," and you have to be aware that they're the same thing) I pretty much always come up with the correct response in reasonable time.
Word thanks for the advice, I'll give that a try. For LR i don't really do any diagramming at all, I usually get through formal logic in arguments by applying ACs to the argument mentally. I usually just try to eliminate ACs rather than find one that fits, and then apply whatever remaining contenders and see if it matches.

If you can do that on a parallel question, go for it. It's probably faster. I just always feel like I'm spinning my wheels on formal logic-y questions when I don't diagram. I can't even find a good place to start.