The value of PT 63 RC
Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 5:51 am
It makes even the most infamous of the modern passages (Noguchi, Kin, Riddle Basin, etc) look so tamable in comparison.
Had I used this for my RC drills in the beginning, RC would have become my favorite section.
It had like the worst possible layout: very dense first passage, literature (my least favorite), and under-the-sea passage...A,B passage was okay...
Anyways that under-the-sea/magma crap was a great discourager for those who read actively. If you read it you'll know what I mean. In the first paragraph, the author tells you a f***'in reason, so you would normally expect him to elaborate on that, but he went on a definition marathon. It was basically like, "Law schools are hard to get into, WHY? the FIRST reason is b/c of LSATS (here, you would expect me to tell you the second reason but instead...). What is LSATs? its a logic exam. What is logic? its a branch of philosophy. What is philosophy??" SHIT how illogical can you get on a logic exam?
anyways just sharin my thoughts
Had I used this for my RC drills in the beginning, RC would have become my favorite section.
It had like the worst possible layout: very dense first passage, literature (my least favorite), and under-the-sea passage...A,B passage was okay...
Anyways that under-the-sea/magma crap was a great discourager for those who read actively. If you read it you'll know what I mean. In the first paragraph, the author tells you a f***'in reason, so you would normally expect him to elaborate on that, but he went on a definition marathon. It was basically like, "Law schools are hard to get into, WHY? the FIRST reason is b/c of LSATS (here, you would expect me to tell you the second reason but instead...). What is LSATs? its a logic exam. What is logic? its a branch of philosophy. What is philosophy??" SHIT how illogical can you get on a logic exam?
anyways just sharin my thoughts