Tripping balls in the desert - had epiphany.
Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2011 8:36 am
I was looking for answers whilst under the effects of a powerful psychedelic, nude in the Sierra desert, to no avail. It wasn't till I stopped looking that an unfamiliar voice called to me and said, "It's not about finding the right answers. It never has been." Changed ma life.
In my LSAT practice, I realized the reason I miss most of the questions that I got wrong is that I'm looking for the right answer. After eliminating the usual 3, sometimes I'm stuck in deciding which one of the remaining two is "more right." Any PS bible will tell you no answer is "more right," there's 1 right and 4 wrong. Instead, don't think about what makes the answers right, think about what makes them wrong. Then you will find your answer.
Maybe this was and always has been obvious to a lot of you, but I think the PS explanation is a bit vague. When you've narrowed it down to 2 answers, instead of thinking about what makes each answer right, look for what makes it wrong. It's much easier to find and when you do there should be no ambiguity.
E.g. Which one of the following would the OP most likely agree with?
A. Wrong.
B. Focusing on wrong answers is the best way to find the right answer.
C. A change in the approach to solving a problem may or may not affect the result.
D. Blah blah
E. Derp derp
Obv. down to B and C.
My old erroneous thought process: "Realistically, I could see him agreeing with both, so which is better? He's obviously pretty fond of his own philosophy; B seems to support it strongly yet C is pretty neutral; I'm thinking B."
New thought process: "It's between B and C. B supports his argument and is aligned with the scope, but he never said it was the best way. Despite favoring one method over another, there could be another method he favors even more. However, he would definitely agree with C."
My final thoughts on the above example is that I think B is intentionally misleading because it is very aligned with my argument. However, its not a question of which one he agrees with the most, its which one he is MOST LIKELY to agree with. The chances of me agreeing to C are 100%. The chances of agreeing with B are not.
again, this is probably obvious to a lot of you. However, maybe this can give someone another perspective on the "1 100% right, 4 100% wrong" idea. If you feel dumber having read this, sorry. Good luck on Sat. erryone.
In my LSAT practice, I realized the reason I miss most of the questions that I got wrong is that I'm looking for the right answer. After eliminating the usual 3, sometimes I'm stuck in deciding which one of the remaining two is "more right." Any PS bible will tell you no answer is "more right," there's 1 right and 4 wrong. Instead, don't think about what makes the answers right, think about what makes them wrong. Then you will find your answer.
Maybe this was and always has been obvious to a lot of you, but I think the PS explanation is a bit vague. When you've narrowed it down to 2 answers, instead of thinking about what makes each answer right, look for what makes it wrong. It's much easier to find and when you do there should be no ambiguity.
E.g. Which one of the following would the OP most likely agree with?
A. Wrong.
B. Focusing on wrong answers is the best way to find the right answer.
C. A change in the approach to solving a problem may or may not affect the result.
D. Blah blah
E. Derp derp
Obv. down to B and C.
My old erroneous thought process: "Realistically, I could see him agreeing with both, so which is better? He's obviously pretty fond of his own philosophy; B seems to support it strongly yet C is pretty neutral; I'm thinking B."
New thought process: "It's between B and C. B supports his argument and is aligned with the scope, but he never said it was the best way. Despite favoring one method over another, there could be another method he favors even more. However, he would definitely agree with C."
My final thoughts on the above example is that I think B is intentionally misleading because it is very aligned with my argument. However, its not a question of which one he agrees with the most, its which one he is MOST LIKELY to agree with. The chances of me agreeing to C are 100%. The chances of agreeing with B are not.
again, this is probably obvious to a lot of you. However, maybe this can give someone another perspective on the "1 100% right, 4 100% wrong" idea. If you feel dumber having read this, sorry. Good luck on Sat. erryone.
