The Official September 2014 Study Group Forum

[valen]

Seems to be a combo slightly harder tests and more modernized strategies than 10 years ago. The games, in my opinion, are a little more straight forward now. The RC seems to be much tougher though

Harder since when about? I'm taking PTs in the 50s right now and I'm wondering if RC has gotten harder since then.

[ilikebaseball]

Seems to be a combo slightly harder tests and more modernized strategies than 10 years ago. The games, in my opinion, are a little more straight forward now. The RC seems to be much tougher though

Harder since when about? I'm taking PTs in the 50s right now and I'm wondering if RC has gotten harder since then.

I feel like its different for everyone. Some people think the games are ridiculously tougher now, when I think theyre much easier. But I definitely think RC is harder now than it used to be. The comparative ones, the passage selection, etc. Almost as if they know how we're all studying for it now and adapting to us by switching it up in the questions or the structure of the passage.

LR seems basically the same to me however. Hit or miss depending on the difficulty.

[Colonel_funkadunk]

LR seems basically the same to me however. Hit or miss depending on the difficulty.

This. While I think certain quextions are a lot diff/ harder overall It seems like curves are made after a hard LG section or tough RC passage. This is obvi a lot of speculation , but one hard game or passage is gonna more easily screw your score more than 1 or 2 harder than avg LR questions

[MadwomanintheAttic]

Been a while since I've posted here, but I've been following along. I took PT 64 and 85 today, scoring a 168 on both!! That's my highest ever. However, I've seen the questions before, so I don't know if that really counts. I didn't remember the answers, but the questions were familiar nonetheless.

I'm enrolled in an online course and I have plenty of hw left to do, but with the 27th around the corner, I'm considering abandoning the homework and focusing on practice test. There are still some LR problems I haven't drilled, but I really need tighten up my timing on the test as a whole. Any suggestions on what I should do? I feel like I'm running out of time.

[BJS]

I actually eliminated A because I thought that since Penn wasn't eligible, it doesn't fit that well with the conclusion - it's not that he should not receive the award, but that he can't. Still confused.

Per manhattan forum, apparently the first principle in that Q introduces a biconditional. Don't have it in front of me, but I remember the modifier was "but not otherwise." So I guess saying something like "if I'm awarded a trophy, then I won, but not otherwise," is a biconditional statement.

Can you explain this more?

[diiggidy]

Typically I get around 4-7 wrong (combined) for LR, but the question types are pretty scattered. Mostly, I'm just getting a few of the hardest questions wrong on each section. I haven't gone through level 3's and 4's in the Cambridge packets yet, and am wondering if it's worth it to go through them. I've only gone through the more common types (Flaw, Strengthen/Weaken, NA, SA) but not the less common (MSS, MBT etc.). Should I skip the level 1's and 2's for these, and go right into the more difficult ones?

Also, any advice for the argument part questions? I've drilled them all in Cambridge, but for some reason I do terrible on them on PTs. I can get it down to two answers, and then pick the wrong one.

[jmjm]

Seems to be a combo slightly harder tests and more modernized strategies than 10 years ago. The games, in my opinion, are a little more straight forward now. The RC seems to be much tougher though

Harder since when about? I'm taking PTs in the 50s right now and I'm wondering if RC has gotten harder since then.

But I definitely think RC is harder now than it used to be.

[BillPackets]

I actually eliminated A because I thought that since Penn wasn't eligible, it doesn't fit that well with the conclusion - it's not that he should not receive the award, but that he can't. Still confused.

Per manhattan forum, apparently the first principle in that Q introduces a biconditional. Don't have it in front of me, but I remember the modifier was "but not otherwise." So I guess saying something like "if I'm awarded a trophy, then I won, but not otherwise," is a biconditional statement.

Can you explain this more?

i'm really still trying to wrap my head around it too. bc to me when you say something like "if A, then B, but not otherwise" the "but not otherwise" seems to me to say "if not A, then not B," but manhattan says that the but not otherwise introduces a biconditional, so the "but not otherwise," moves the B to a sufficient condition.

[BillPackets]

btw guys i finally figured out how to use paint and now have a tar so you can imagine me IRL happy monday

[Gray]

.

[BillPackets]

btw guys i finally figured out how to use paint and now have a tar so you can imagine me IRL happy monday

Pic whore over here so we can imagine you accurately: Rate yourself on a 1-10 scale

yo i put picwhored a vid this morning to no response so now i'm really embarrassed and dont want to again

[Colonel_funkadunk]

btw guys i finally figured out how to use paint and now have a tar so you can imagine me IRL happy monday

Pic whore over here so we can imagine you accurately: Rate yourself on a 1-10 scale

He posted a sweet vid in that thread that I edited- check it out. The live action pw is credited

[Colonel_funkadunk]

btw guys i finally figured out how to use paint and now have a tar so you can imagine me IRL happy monday

Pic whore over here so we can imagine you accurately: Rate yourself on a 1-10 scale

He posted a sweet vid in that thread that I edited- check it out. The live action pw is credited

Oh nbd disregard this then

[CFC1524]

I actually eliminated A because I thought that since Penn wasn't eligible, it doesn't fit that well with the conclusion - it's not that he should not receive the award, but that he can't. Still confused.

Per manhattan forum, apparently the first principle in that Q introduces a biconditional. Don't have it in front of me, but I remember the modifier was "but not otherwise." So I guess saying something like "if I'm awarded a trophy, then I won, but not otherwise," is a biconditional statement.

Can you explain this more?

i'm really still trying to wrap my head around it too. bc to me when you say something like "if A, then B, but not otherwise" the "but not otherwise" seems to me to say "if not A, then not B," but manhattan says that the but not otherwise introduces a biconditional, so the "but not otherwise," moves the B to a sufficient condition.

If George wants ice cream, then Chris wants ice cream, but not otherwise.

Logically, this sentence can be written as follows:
G --> C and /G ---> /C

If you take the contrapositive of the second statement, we can create a bi-conditional:
G <---> C

[Colonel_funkadunk]

I actually eliminated A because I thought that since Penn wasn't eligible, it doesn't fit that well with the conclusion - it's not that he should not receive the award, but that he can't. Still confused.

Per manhattan forum, apparently the first principle in that Q introduces a biconditional. Don't have it in front of me, but I remember the modifier was "but not otherwise." So I guess saying something like "if I'm awarded a trophy, then I won, but not otherwise," is a biconditional statement.

Can you explain this more?

i'm really still trying to wrap my head around it too. bc to me when you say something like "if A, then B, but not otherwise" the "but not otherwise" seems to me to say "if not A, then not B," but manhattan says that the but not otherwise introduces a biconditional, so the "but not otherwise," moves the B to a sufficient condition.

The but not otherwise means that only a can lead to b. So if a then b, but there is no other way to lead to b, then if b then a is valid also. Hence biconditional.

[BillPackets]

If George wants ice cream, then Chris wants ice cream, but not otherwise.

Logically, this sentence can be written as follows:
G --> C and /G ---> /C

If you take the contrapositive of the second statement, we can create a bi-conditional:
G <---> C

ah, ok. i was missing that contra step. thank you.

[Gray]

.

[Colonel_funkadunk]

btw guys i finally figured out how to use paint and now have a tar so you can imagine me IRL happy monday

Pic whore over here so we can imagine you accurately: Rate yourself on a 1-10 scale

yo i put picwhored a vid this morning to no response so now i'm really embarrassed and dont want to again

crap did I miss it? I missed 90% of the PW-ing last night; it was sad.

It's easy to miss something that's only up for 35 seconds.

And I too missed the substantial portion of pw'ing going on

[Gray]

.

[BillPackets]

crap did I miss it? I missed 90% of the PW-ing last night; it was sad.

I was thinking about the cops LR question and I read it again this morning. Somehow it makes a lot more sense now.

i couldnt figure out how to embed it (non youtube) so it was just a link. easy to miss.

for me, the trouble w the cops question was the subtlety of what made the right answer right. the second part of the principle is so long, it kind of grabs your attention away from the first principle. so for me, i was focusing on the second statement, while the first was on the backburner (in addition to misreading the first).

the principle-application questions are starting to show up quite a bit more in the early-mid 60s. they're on ok question type.

[BillPackets]

My eyebrows got some positive feedback. I love TLS.

yyyeah i saw the solid page about about smccgrey's eyebrows. i'm genuinely intrigued bc i dont know that ive ever seen someone's eyebrows and thot "wow look at those EYEBROWS." i feel like eyebrows are one of those things that can only hurt you. like, if you have good eyebrows then it's nbd, not a positive or negative, just a thing, but if you have some weird brows, then it's like sup w the brows on him/her?

[Gray]

.

[Toby Ziegler]

I've never even read the writing sample page/instructions. I am going to do that today (that's not all I'm going to do, obvs).

[Colonel_funkadunk]

crap did I miss it? I missed 90% of the PW-ing last night; it was sad.

It's easy to miss something that's only up for 35 seconds.

And I too missed the substantial portion of pw'ing going on

My eyebrows got some positive feedback. I love TLS.

Nothing like a boost of confidence via lawlzers

[BJS]

I am feeling really stupid because I still don't understand the cop question. Why is B wrong? In A, Franklin is eligible and Penn is not - so the conclusion is reached. In B, Franklin satisfies the requirements of receiving the award and Penn did not - so the conclusion is also reached. At least, that's the way I read it. What am I doing wrong?