Top Law Schools

After taking the October I wouldn't say that the logic Bible is useless, but it seems there were a few types not in the Bible.

While I can see worth of them, have they lost a bit after October?

I never used LGB, and always score -0/-1 on LG. You don't need it.

Every thing on the test was in the LGB. Study harder.

kkklick wrote:I never used LGB, and always score -0/-1 on LG. You don't need it. I'm a douche and I'm better than you.

Fixed for what you were actually trying to say.

The LGB only teaches you how to diagram and gives you a basic overview of how to tackle the questions. The rest (learning to get -0 everytime) is up to you.

The Reasoning one.

Sorry, not games. Games still good.

Reason seemed to have a lot not covered or just too simple.

wildcatmccane wrote:The Reasoning one.

Sorry, not games. Games still good.

Reason seemed to have a lot not covered or just too simple.

Ok, this is more reasonable. Ya, the LR's have been changing around a bit in recent tests.

So if Shakespear and what not is a new type...just hope Powerscore releases a new one before December if score comes back bad from October or is there a way to start figuring these out?

bk187 wrote:

kkklick wrote:I never used LGB, and always score -0/-1 on LG. You don't need it. I'm a douche and I'm better than you.

Fixed for what you were actually trying to say.

No, what I'm trying to say is I'm tired of everyone saying the LGB was a God sent (pardon the pun). IT is completely not necessary in order to tackle the logic games section. Practicing questions alone and an Oxford course got me from getting -14 to -0

bk187 wrote:

kkklick wrote:I never used LGB, and always score -0/-1 on LG. You don't need it. I'm a douche and I'm better than you.

Fixed for what you were actually trying to say.

And yes I'm better than you, but no not a douche

lol...there is no such thing as "new" logic or a "new" argument. The Willy Shake question just tested common sense...

However, if you'd like a more in-depth look at arguementation, you should check out this...http://www.amazon.com/Informal-Logic-Pr ... 345&sr=8-1.

It is much more in-depth and nuanced than what is tested on the LSAT, but I wouldn't count it toward "study time." I'd just read a chapter everyday in you leisure time.

kkklick wrote:And yes I'm better than you, but no not a douche

I don't see how inefficient study makes one better. I'm sure anyone can find their way from the east coast to the west coast without a map, but it's unlikely that they would just happen upon the fastest or best route.

longdaysjourney wrote:lol...there is no such thing as "new" logic or a "new" argument. The Willy Shake question just tested common sense...

However, if you'd like a more in-depth look at arguementation, you should check out this...http://www.amazon.com/Informal-Logic-Pr ... 345&sr=8-1.

It is much more in-depth and nuanced than what is tested on the LSAT, but I wouldn't count it toward "study time." I'd just read a chapter everyday in you leisure time.

Although it would be best to read during leisure time it is by no means a leisurely read, as it is almost textbook-like. But I agree that Walton's book gives a much more thorough account of informal logic that is somewhat helpful but largely unnecessary.

I think there comes a point where the bibles or textbooks can't teach you anymore. You sort of just have to learn what works for you. For LR what helped me most was moving quickly in the earlier questions enabling myself to take my time once I hit questions 19/20 on. By faster I mean about 60 seconds per question.

longdaysjourney wrote:

kkklick wrote:And yes I'm better than you, but no not a douche

I don't see how inefficient study makes one better. I'm sure anyone can find their way from the east coast to the west coast without a map, but it's unlikely that they would just happen upon the fastest or best route.

Or different routes are better suited to different people. I tried the LGB, didn't find it helpful in the least. Nothing like practice IMO. If your starting Logic games fresh and you dont have a prep course, then I say use the LGB to make the best of a bad situation

Unshake wrote:

longdaysjourney wrote:lol...there is no such thing as "new" logic or a "new" argument. The Willy Shake question just tested common sense...

However, if you'd like a more in-depth look at arguementation, you should check out this...http://www.amazon.com/Informal-Logic-Pr ... 345&sr=8-1.

It is much more in-depth and nuanced than what is tested on the LSAT, but I wouldn't count it toward "study time." I'd just read a chapter everyday in you leisure time.

Although it would be best to read during leisure time it is by no means a leisurely read, as it is almost textbook-like. But I agree that Walton's book gives a much more thorough account of informal logic that is somewhat helpful but largely unnecessary.

I think there comes a point where the bibles or textbooks can't teach you anymore. You sort of just have to learn what works for you. For LR what helped me most was moving quickly in the earlier questions enabling myself to take my time once I hit questions 19/20 on. By faster I mean about 60 seconds per question.

Some questions I solved in about 5 seconds, loved those. This is the best way to do it. Because everyone will encounter LR questions that need a good solid 2 minutes to solve because of the subtle word changes.

Unshake wrote:For LR what helped me most was moving quickly in the earlier questions enabling myself to take my time once I hit questions 19/20 on. By faster I mean about 60 seconds per question.

True. What I realized is that if I have finished question 15 by the time 15 min. rolls around, I have set myself up for an easy -0.

kkklick wrote:If your starting Logic games fresh and you dont have a prep course, then I say use the LGB to make the best of a bad situation

I don't think that working through the LGB is by any means "making the best out of a bad situation." I mean, what can some dude making 10 bucks an hour tell you about logic games that a book can't?

kkklick wrote:I tried the LGB, didn't find it helpful in the least. Nothing like practice IMO.

I don't think that anyone has argued that you should just read through the LG bible as a substitute for practice. And sure, some parts of the bible are pretty remedial, but I find it hard to believe that someone could work through the games bible and not take away anything valuable.

I was talking about the Logical Reasoning Bible.

I mean to say it is not complete any longer.

The Shakespear question was silly. Anyone who knows the history of Shakespear knows that question. It is referencing a real play. I am not sure the logic behind it.

LGB got me from +7 or +6 to +20 ish in about three weeks. But I agree - it may not be the best thing for advanced students, and some of the ways they say to do diagrams clearly take too much time.

LR Bible I never found to be much help at all, but then again, I'm a natural at LR and definitely not at LG.

bk187 wrote:

kkklick wrote:I never used LGB, and always score -0/-1 on LG. You don't need it. I'm a douche and I'm better than you.

Fixed for what you were actually trying to say.

I guess someone feels threatened by those that seem to be in a position of mental superiority over him or her, and perhaps rightfully so, no? I mean honestly, those that have a 3.7+ GPA and a 172+ score are more likely to eventually parlay their performance into better pay, higher social status, and, in general, access to more of life's "perks" than those without such badges. And as much as class hierarchy is veiled in the US by the tenets of equality and individual determination, it nevertheless exists and determines, for many if not all people, the quality of their relative existence. Hence, it would seem that the lower levels of society's strata do indeed have much to envy, and perhaps resent, from those that are, more or less, above them. The more that this resentment is expressed, however, the more the insecurity and spite of those in inferior positions is revealed and fueled. Given that the present state of the US consists of circumstances in plain contrast to historically prevalent affairs in pre-revolutionary occasions, thus precluding great likelihood for successful uprising against the establishment, this will likely result in only one thing: the continued and heightened misery of the lower classes, who devote so much useless energy, often incredibly subtle, at consciously or subconsciously attacking a system that rules them and will continue to rule them for some time. The verdict? SHUT UP.

MysticalWheel wrote:

bk187 wrote:

kkklick wrote:I never used LGB, and always score -0/-1 on LG. You don't need it. I'm a douche and I'm better than you.

Fixed for what you were actually trying to say.

I guess someone feels threatened by those that seem to be in a position of mental superiority over him or her, and perhaps rightfully so, no? I mean honestly, those that have a 3.7+ GPA and a 172+ score are more likely to eventually parlay their performance into better pay, higher social status, and, in general, access to more of life's "perks" than those without such badges. And as much as class hierarchy is veiled in the US by the tenets of equality and individual determination, it nevertheless exists and determines, for many if not all people, the quality of their relative existence. Hence, it would seem that the lower levels of society's strata do indeed have much to envy, and perhaps resent, from those that are, more or less, above them. The more that this resentment is expressed, however, the more the insecurity and spite of those in inferior positions is revealed and fueled. Given that the present state of the US consists of circumstances in plain contrast to historically prevalent affairs in pre-revolutionary occasions, thus precluding great likelihood for successful uprising against the establishment, this will likely result in only one thing: the continued and heightened misery of the lower classes, who devote so much useless energy, often incredibly subtle, at consciously or subconsciously attacking a system that rules them and will continue to rule them for some time. The verdict? SHUT UP. I've never been laid.

Fixed for what you were actually trying to say.

MysticalWheel wrote:

bk187 wrote:

kkklick wrote:I never used LGB, and always score -0/-1 on LG. You don't need it. I'm a douche and I'm better than you.

Fixed for what you were actually trying to say.

I guess someone feels threatened by those that seem to be in a position of mental superiority over him or her, and perhaps rightfully so, no? I mean honestly, those that have a 3.7+ GPA and a 172+ score are more likely to eventually parlay their performance into better pay, higher social status, and, in general, access to more of life's "perks" than those without such badges. And as much as class hierarchy is veiled in the US by the tenets of equality and individual determination, it nevertheless exists and determines, for many if not all people, the quality of their relative existence. Hence, it would seem that the lower levels of society's strata do indeed have much to envy, and perhaps resent, from those that are, more or less, above them. The more that this resentment is expressed, however, the more the insecurity and spite of those in inferior positions is revealed and fueled. Given that the present state of the US consists of circumstances in plain contrast to historically prevalent affairs in pre-revolutionary occasions, thus precluding great likelihood for successful uprising against the establishment, this will likely result in only one thing: the continued and heightened misery of the lower classes, who devote so much useless energy, often incredibly subtle, at consciously or subconsciously attacking a system that rules them and will continue to rule them for some time. The verdict? SHUT UP.

This is really stupid. There are too many people on this sight who justify their own insecurity with rants like this. These are not the words of a confident person. But the words are big so you're smart right?

I didn't use the LR bible because I've always been good at LR. Still a strategy that works for 47/51 of the LR questions is still valuable. Plus I'm not so sure the TLS consensus on all the answers is right.

MysticalWheel wrote:I guess someone feels threatened by those that seem to be in a position of mental superiority ... Blah blah blah ... The verdict? SHUT UP.

Get over yourself. Take the bloody LSAT. Get in to a T1 school. Graduate. Then we'll talk about your alleged mental superiority after you remember how you were humbled as a 1L.

kkklick wrote:I never used LGB, and always score -0/-1 on LG. You don't need it.

How's your LR?