LSAC f**ked up on PT1-S3-Q2 Forum

Nulli Secundus · Post by **Nulli Secundus** » Thu Jan 15, 2015 8:12 am

I<3ScholarlySweets! wrote:Invalid statements cannot be considered reasoning alone--that is an abuse of language. If a statement is invalid, you must use "flawed" to modify "reasononing" which is equivalent to: "A statement that is invalid."

Nope since "reasononing" is not a word, if you modify it with "flawed", you would only be describing the current situation accurately. Reasononing is indeed flawed.

I<3ScholarlySweets! · Post by **I<3ScholarlySweets!** » Thu Jan 15, 2015 11:56 pm

LJL at you making fun, and condescending, my typo. Are you a poli-sci shithead?

ilikebaseball · Post by **ilikebaseball** » Thu Jan 15, 2015 11:57 pm

I<3ScholarlySweets! wrote:LJL at you making fun, and condescending, my typo. Are you a poli-sci shithead?

ya he's being condescending

stray · Post by **stray** » Thu Jan 15, 2015 11:59 pm

03152016 · Post by **03152016** » Fri Jan 16, 2015 12:04 am

I<3ScholarlySweets! wrote:Invalid statements cannot be considered reasoning alone--that is an abuse of language. If a statement is invalid, you must use "flawed" to modify "reasononing" which is equivalent to: "A statement that is invalid."

well you sure convinced me

I<3ScholarlySweets! · Post by **I<3ScholarlySweets!** » Fri Jan 16, 2015 12:07 am

stray, are you dense?

I<3ScholarlySweets! · Post by **I<3ScholarlySweets!** » Fri Jan 16, 2015 12:12 am

Nice edit, stray!

A. Nony Mouse · Post by **A. Nony Mouse** » Fri Jan 16, 2015 12:16 am

Stop. If you're not willing to listen to others' opinions and just want to show how smart you are, don't post.

LSAC f**ked up on PT1-S3-Q2 Forum

Re: LSAC fucked up on PT1-S3-Q2

Re: LSAC fucked up on PT1-S3-Q2

Re: LSAC fucked up on PT1-S3-Q2

Re: LSAC fucked up on PT1-S3-Q2

Re: LSAC fucked up on PT1-S3-Q2

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Re: LSAC fucked up on PT1-S3-Q2

Re: LSAC fucked up on PT1-S3-Q2

Re: LSAC fucked up on PT1-S3-Q2

Register for access!