The Official February 2015 Study Group Forum

[Rigo]

[Dr. Nefario]

You're a special snowflake ITT.

ETA: holding onto that special snowflake status from now on. May even make 180 special snowflakes of February the title of the waiters thread if I get to.

[NL2424]

..

[Big Red]

These last 3 Friday's are rest days & real homework days for me. It's crazy to think I only have 3 more rest days before this is all over. Every day prepping flies by. My mind never shuts off

Wait you only need to spend 1 day on UG work and can get by?

[NL2424]

..

[Dr. Nefario]

So jealous of you Zac. My classes are killing me already. #k-jdprobz

[Oskosh]

Was accepted into Berkeley... so probably won't be retaking this cycle hahaha. :p Still debating June, though...

Good luck to you guys!

[Rigo]

[m27]

I wanted to ask a question about a LR problem that hasn't been specifically addressed on the Manhattan LR forum.

PT 46, LR Section 3, Question 24: "Editorialist: Despite the importance it seems..."

Task: Sufficient assumption
Conclusion: Money does not exist [~E]
Support: A universal loss of belief in it [money] --> money disappears [LB --> D]

Obviously, there is a gap between money 'existing' and 'disappearing'. When I did this section on the clock, I initially thought that the missing assumption was something along the lines of:
"If something disappears, it does not exist" [D --> ~E] or the contrapositive:
"If it exists, then it does not disappear" [E --> ~D]

On the Manhattan LSAT forum, however, the geeks said that the missing assumption is:
If a universal loss of belief makes something disappear, then it does not exist [(LB --> D) --> ~E]

CR: (A) Anything that exists would continue to exist even if everyone were to stop believing in it.

I understand how (LB --> D) --> ~E translates into the CR, but how should I have came to that as the assumption. Grr

Can someone shed some light on this question pleszzzeee so I don't screw something similar up ever again ever ever?

[Oskosh]

I wanted to ask a question about a LR problem that hasn't been specifically addressed on the Manhattan LR forum.

PT 46, LR Section 3, Question 24: "Editorialist: Despite the importance it seems..."

Task: Sufficient assumption
Conclusion: Money does not exist [~E]
Support: A universal loss of belief in it [money] --> money disappears [LB --> D]

Obviously, there is a gap between money 'existing' and 'disappearing'. When I did this section on the clock, I initially thought that the missing assumption was something along the lines of:
"If something disappears, it does not exist" [D --> ~E] or the contrapositive:
"If it exists, then it does not disappear" [E --> ~D]

On the Manhattan LSAT forum, however, the geeks said that the missing assumption is:
If a universal loss of belief makes something disappear, then it does not exist [(LB --> D) --> ~E]

CR: (A) Anything that exists would continue to exist even if everyone were to stop believing in it.

I understand how (LB --> D) --> ~E translates into the CR, but how should I have came to that as the assumption. Grr

Can someone shed some light on this question pleszzzeee so I don't screw something similar up ever again ever ever?

\
Conclusion: Money does not really exist
Support: All that would be needed for money to disappear would be a universal loss of belief.

I'm not going to lie, it would be very difficult to prephrase the correct answer, but I would pick up on the strong language + process of elimination. "all" that would be needed and "universal" are pretty strong statements.


Eliminate: C because there is no discussion of practical consequences; E does not touch upon the gap so eliminate it; B can be eliminated because there is no talk about mistaken beliefs; eliminate D because it reverses the chain of logic.

A would make the most sense because it completes the chain of logic.

All it would take for money not to exist would be for people to believe in it

if r, continue to exist even if people stopped believing in it

money ceases to exist when people stop believing in it, therefore not real.


It completes the logic chain.

Basically, you have to accept that some questions will be very difficult to prephrase, and this is where you have to use other strategies. I would not expect you to prephrase this answer, because it is very wordy, and the author uses different wording to represent the same idea.

tough lol.

[leslieknope]

Printer died at least it had the courtesy to print all the shit I need for tomorrow before kicking it.

[Smallville]

Morning
eta: so woke up early, spent some time on forums, reviewed 3 NA sets I did b4 bed last night, worked out (and did 15 MC probs in-between sets), did another NA set and made breakfast and here I am decent morning

[jjf3md]

Is the feb test different then the prep tests? I hear different opinions? Anyone take a past Feb test who has a opinion?

[MEAhrnsbrak]

Morning
eta: so woke up early, spent some time on forums, reviewed 3 NA sets I did b4 bed last night, worked out (and did 15 MC probs in-between sets), did another NA set and made breakfast and here I am decent morning

That's awesome! I had the exact opposite morning and am a little envious of your productivity. I slept in (reading posts on my iPad in bed) and have been debating if I should get up and PT at my house, the library, or Starbucks. The reason for my laziness is because I started doing crossfit again a week or so ago and my workouts this week have literally every muscle in my body sore aka I have been waaaaay slower deciding how to start my day than I should. I'm thinking once it hits 9:00 excuses go out the door and I get up and work.

[NL2424]

..

[Dr. Nefario]

It's a beautiful day in snowy Texas. Ripe for study.

[nlee10]

Do you guys ever review PT's again after BR?

[Smallville]

Do you guys ever review PT's again after BR?

I typically dont unless I retake it though I believe many people take the questions they struggled with and put them in a word doc or something to redo

[nlee10]

Do you guys ever review PT's again after BR?

I typically dont unless I retake it though I believe many people take the questions they struggled with and put them in a word doc or something to redo

hmmm. PT 72, especially LR, was tricky yesterday so probably going to look over some of the trap questions/and redo LG/RC. I think that'll be my LSAT studying for today.

I'm testing to be a personal trainer next month and neglected the readings that I need to do...so probably catching up today. lol

[NL2424]

..

[ilikebaseball]

lololol i lost my voice overnight

[Big Red]

Do you guys ever review PT's again after BR?

I typically dont unless I retake it though I believe many people take the questions they struggled with and put them in a word doc or something to redo

I probably would if I hadn't gotten in the habit of ripping them up after I take them.

But I always do take a second peek through after I grade it just to confirm questions I had issues with.

[Dr. Nefario]

I review it a bit, but only the questions I really have issues with

[Shakawkaw]

Hope everyone's Friday is productive. I expect all of you to get up early tomorrow and do a PT.

Zacbro - I got your PM. I'll respond during lunch, twerk is busy today.

ETA: I might just post my response ITT in case others find it useful as well.

[NL2424]

..