The Official December 2014 Study Group Forum

[Smallville]

I may fall asleep at work today -_- why am I up so early...

ETA: Good mornin y'all

[nlee10]

I may fall asleep at work today -_- why am I up so early...

ETA: Good mornin y'all

Morning.

Taking today off other than some leisure reading and a LG game or two.

Plan for the weekend:
Saturday:
4 LG games (timed per game)
4 RC's (timed per passage)
2 full LR sections (timed per section)

I'm start to improve my accuracy with LG and RC under time, but LR is being a pain right now with accuracy.

Sunday:
PT 66 + BR

[Shakawkaw]

I may fall asleep at work today -_- why am I up so early...

ETA: Good mornin y'all

Morning.

Taking today off other than some leisure reading and a LG game or two.

Plan for the weekend:
Saturday:
4 LG games (timed per game)
4 RC's (timed per passage)
2 full LR sections (timed per section)

I'm start to improve my accuracy with LG and RC under time, but LR is being a pain right now with accuracy.

Sunday:
PT 66 + BR

Basically a 4 section PT.

ETA - what's the leisure reading? I've had DFW sitting on my shelf since I've started college. Still halfway through it.

[nlee10]

Basically a 4 section PT.

ETA - what's the leisure reading? I've had DFW sitting on my shelf since I've started college. Still halfway through it.

Pretty much. haha.

I actually got a subscription of The Economist recently and actually enjoy the articles. I enjoy reading econ/business/political/science type of articles and I think that translates into RC because I sure hate humanity ones.

[peppermint]

.

[LSATneurotic]

Checkin' in, folks.

Due to a streak of masochism, I've decided I'm going to study for a month and see if I can improve on my 170. I'm aiming for eight PTs and ten or so LG sections before Dec 6th. Shooting for a 173+.

Good luck everyone! Depending on how this goes, you might see me in February.

[mist4bison]

.

[blumenthal]

I've done so much RC practice I can barely stand reading street signs

[longhorn65]

Checkin' in, folks.

Due to a streak of masochism, I've decided I'm going to study for a month and see if I can improve on my 170. I'm aiming for eight PTs and ten or so LG sections before Dec 6th. Shooting for a 173+.

Good luck everyone! Depending on how this goes, you might see me in February.

Welcome and goodluck!

[longhorn65]

I may fall asleep at work today -_- why am I up so early...

ETA: Good mornin y'all

Morning.

Taking today off other than some leisure reading and a LG game or two.

Plan for the weekend:
Saturday:
4 LG games (timed per game)
4 RC's (timed per passage)
2 full LR sections (timed per section)

I'm start to improve my accuracy with LG and RC under time, but LR is being a pain right now with accuracy.

Sunday:
PT 66 + BR

Sounds like a good weekend prep set up. I may have to follow you on it!

[Smallville]

Checkin' in, folks.

Due to a streak of masochism, I've decided I'm going to study for a month and see if I can improve on my 170. I'm aiming for eight PTs and ten or so LG sections before Dec 6th. Shooting for a 173+.

Good luck everyone! Depending on how this goes, you might see me in February.

sup, shooting for more money? seen you on acceptance/denial/waitlist threads while lurking :p

All you readers... I dont even know the last time I ran... was probably the Hunger Games

[LSATneurotic]

Checkin' in, folks.

Due to a streak of masochism, I've decided I'm going to study for a month and see if I can improve on my 170. I'm aiming for eight PTs and ten or so LG sections before Dec 6th. Shooting for a 173+.

Good luck everyone! Depending on how this goes, you might see me in February.

sup, shooting for more money? seen you on acceptance/denial/waitlist threads while lurking :p

All you readers... I dont even know the last time I ran... was probably the Hunger Games

The only school I want to go to is Harvard, more monies elsewhere is just an irrelevant perk. Finding the motivation for a retake has been difficult

[Shakawkaw]

DFW=something by David Foster Wallace? I can't think of any other books/authors for DFW

Yis, David Foster Wallace. I've got Infinite Jest. Probably good practice for RC.

[mist4bison]

.

[nlee10]

I think I'm going to deactivate my fb later tonight. It's crunch time!

[Smallville]

I think I'm going to deactivate my fb later tonight. It's crunch time!

lol I barely spend any time on fb anymore... its all TLS

[Rigo]

[Colonel_funkadunk]

I think I'm going to deactivate my fb later tonight. It's crunch time!

There's an inch of dust on my facebook. I barely use it anymore, LSAT or not.

i bet there is an inch of dust on your baseboards too you dirty mf'er

[Rigo]

[sashafierce]

Just completed + BR PT67

LR1 -4
LR2 -3
RC -5
LG -2
Exp LG -6
Raw 86
Scaled 167 (+1 score increase from last PT)

LG: So I'm pleased with my LG, after getting my first -0 on PT 53 I decided to drill LG for a week to ensure that I get -0 on my next PT, I did not get -0 but -2 is close enough

LR- this is my highest LR score to date, I attribute that to my decision to finally drill PR and PF rather than skip them during PT which is what I usually did.

RC- same score as my last two PTs, I haven't been drilling RC at all for weeks, I just try to work faster so I don't have to guess on an entire passage. I plan to dedicate a week to intense RC drilling soon.

Overall my score is improving because I'm really really focused on my mistakes, figuring out what they are and trying my best to learn from them so that I never make the same mistake twice.

[Superstaranonymous]

.

[nlee10]

Great job on those PT's! Hope to report good news on Sunday as well.

[Ron (PowerScore)]

dasani13 wrote:
PT 60
LR1 #23 confused the shit out of me. I still don't get it even after BR.

Hey Dasani, maybe I can help with that.

This is a Strengthen-Principle question, so we're looking for a rule that strengthens the conclusion. The conclusion's weak because it's talking about the effect of strong libel laws on the development of a good reputation, when the premises never discussed good reputations. Here's how the argument proceeded:

P: defines libel (damaging person's reputation by making false statements)

P: no one says anything bad about public figures because they're afraid of libel lawsuits permitted by strong libel laws

C: strong libel laws prevent anyone in the public eye from having a good reputation

The first premise just defined "libel" for us, and doesn't do anything other than that in support of the conclusion. So, the conclusion really just results from the second premise. Given the absolute conclusion, we can say that the author is essentially applying an implicit conditional rule:

If no one says anything bad about public figures, then no one in the public eye can have a good reputation.

Given that this is a Strengthen - Principle question, we can prephrase that the correct answer choice will explicitly state this rule implicitly applied by the author to reach the conclusion. Answer choice (E) does that, with a bit of a twist. If no one says anything bad about a public figure, then there can't be public figures with bad reputations. This answer tells us that if there are no public figures with bad reputations, then there can't be public figures with good reputations.

Hope that helps.

Ron

[portmanteaux]

Any tips on what to do with the LR questions you get wrong or weren't sure about from tests and Cambridge packets? Do you review them later? I have been writing explanations and cutting them out to review later, but it just seems like an overwhelming amount to go over.

[nlee10]

I am enjoying my LSAT-free day.

Hoping this mental break will help me break the 160 barrier.