Will be taking OCT LSAT. But need some advice - Please help. Forum

[stray]

OK, so I will be going into my second semester of Junior year in February. I have a 4.0 so far, and am starting to get ready for the next big part for admission to Law schools. I plan on taking the LSAT during October 2013 (of my senior year) . I really want to sit down and go balls out about 4 months before the test after my school ends (during the end of May). I will do the brunt of my intense studying then, but I was wondering if you guys can tell me what I should do for the months from Jan to May. I don't want to get too much into it just so I can focus on maintaining that 4.0, but I would like to start some basic studying. I plan on reading news sources like Wall Street Journal, Scientific American, The New Yorker everyday for a bit (a practice I already started), but what else? Should I slowly and carefully read through the PowerScore Bibles (I already have em), or something else? I really do want to get above a 170 on this test (as everyone else I imagine), so along with my 4.0, I can have a good shot at a top school.

Thanks guys. Appreciate any help.

[maxwell400]

Take the June LSAT.

[stray]

I really would not feel comfortable doing that. I honestly want to get completely prepared and just take it once during OCT. I would just like to focus primarily on schoolwork for the next couple of months and spend some time familiarizing myself with the test. Really just curious on what I can do for 5 months before I just sit down and completely immerse my self in prep during the summer when I can spend long hours studying.

[Shmoopy]

I suggest making sure you have a strong grasp of conditionals and deductive logic.

[stray]

Yup, this is the kind of stuff I'm looking for. You know of any specific books I should look into?
BTW is there a way to reply to a particular post in this forum?

[Nova]

You know of any specific books I should look into?
BTW is there a way to reply to a particular post in this forum?

quote button in the bottom right hand cornor of the post you want to reply to.

Buy the manhattan bundle. M > PS

http://www.amazon.com/Manhattan-LSAT-Se ... sat+bundle

[stray]

You know of any specific books I should look into?
BTW is there a way to reply to a particular post in this forum?

quote button in the bottom right hand cornor of the post you want to reply to.

Buy the manhattan bundle. M > PS

http://www.amazon.com/Manhattan-LSAT-Se ... sat+bundle

So I should start reading these strategy books already? Is the idea behind this that I will have 4 months of just practice tests during the summer?

[dingbat]

I'd suggest buying some books of logic puzzles and do them in your own time. They're a great way to prep for logic games through practice

[Nova]

So I should start reading these strategy books already? Is the idea behind this that I will have 4 months of just practice tests during the summer?

Yeah.

But you dont want to just take PTs in the summer. Youll want to drill by question type too. Check this guide out

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 6&t=195603

Drilling resources:
http://www.cambridgelsat.com/bundles/lo ... g-by-type/
http://www.cambridgelsat.com/bundles/lo ... s-by-type/

[Shmoopy]

I learned about conditionals mostly through classes at school, so i cant recommend any books. If you are good at teaching yourself things, I suggest just chewing through some of this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth-func ... l_calculus

See the basic and derived argument forms towards the middle of the page. Know how and why these work. Don't worry about the other stuff, except for the rest of the natural deduction system.

Also learn this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_connective

Edit: And this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-order_logic ( just the syntax part until you until you get to the semantics part. The diagrams under loving relation are something you should understand.)

If you can really understand ~90% of this, you will know all the logic you need for the LSAT. The next step will be applying this logic to the types of questions that appear on the test.

[stray]

I learned about conditionals mostly through classes at school, so i cant recommend any books. If you are good at teaching yourself things, I suggest just chewing through some of this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth-func ... l_calculus

See the basic and derived argument forms towards the middle of the page. Know how and why these work. Don't worry about the other stuff, except for the rest of the natural deduction system.

Also learn this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_connective

Edit: And this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-order_logic ( just the syntax part until you until you get to the semantics part. The diagrams under loving relation are something you should understand.)

If you can really understand ~90% of this, you will know all the logic you need for the LSAT. The next step will be applying this logic to the types of questions that appear on the test.

Thank you. I will do my best getting through that. I guess I'll just print out those wiki pages and see where it leads. Maybe I'll look into finding a textbook that is related to it.

In addition to this, so far I got that I should start reading the strategy guides and get some logic puzzles workbooks. Sounds like pretty solid advice. If anyone else has any other advice that I can use in addition to this, I'm open to anything. Thanks again guys, I honestly do appreciate the help.

[Shmoopy]

You might want to click around before printing. For example, on the logical connectives page you will probably want to click on material conditional to see what that actually is.

Also, this is fairly theoretical stuff. I think a strong foundation in logic (you should have plenty of time) will make the application of logic easier and more productive, but getting started on some actual practice tests and LSAT books will probably be more practical.

[Shmoopy]

I learned about conditionals mostly through classes at school, so i cant recommend any books. If you are good at teaching yourself things, I suggest just chewing through some of this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth-func ... l_calculus

See the basic and derived argument forms towards the middle of the page. Know how and why these work. Don't worry about the other stuff, except for the rest of the natural deduction system.

Also learn this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_connective

Edit: And this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-order_logic ( just the syntax part until you until you get to the semantics part. The diagrams under loving relation are something you should understand.)

If you can really understand ~90% of this, you will know all the logic you need for the LSAT. The next step will be applying this logic to the types of questions that appear on the test.

Thank you. I will do my best getting through that. I guess I'll just print out those wiki pages and see where it leads. Maybe I'll look into finding a textbook that is related to it.

In addition to this, so far I got that I should start reading the strategy guides and get some logic puzzles workbooks. Sounds like pretty solid advice. If anyone else has any other advice that I can use in addition to this, I'm open to anything. Thanks again guys, I honestly do appreciate the help.

OP: also check this out:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth_table

[stray]

I learned about conditionals mostly through classes at school, so i cant recommend any books. If you are good at teaching yourself things, I suggest just chewing through some of this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth-func ... l_calculus

See the basic and derived argument forms towards the middle of the page. Know how and why these work. Don't worry about the other stuff, except for the rest of the natural deduction system.

Also learn this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_connective

Edit: And this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-order_logic ( just the syntax part until you until you get to the semantics part. The diagrams under loving relation are something you should understand.)

If you can really understand ~90% of this, you will know all the logic you need for the LSAT. The next step will be applying this logic to the types of questions that appear on the test.

Thank you. I will do my best getting through that. I guess I'll just print out those wiki pages and see where it leads. Maybe I'll look into finding a textbook that is related to it.

In addition to this, so far I got that I should start reading the strategy guides and get some logic puzzles workbooks. Sounds like pretty solid advice. If anyone else has any other advice that I can use in addition to this, I'm open to anything. Thanks again guys, I honestly do appreciate the help.

OP: also check this out:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth_table

Will do, thanks. Also I have found a course in my school for Intro to Symbolic Logic, which I am assuming much of this falls into...I'm thinking about taking it. Thoughts?

[bitsy]

Will do, thanks. Also I have found a course in my school for Intro to Symbolic Logic, which I am assuming much of this falls into...I'm thinking about taking it. Thoughts?

i took a class in Symbolic Logic and really enjoyed it. though only about 10% of what we learned was useful on the LSAT, it made questions with formal logic very quick, because i was used to translating sentences in my head. however, the class can nuke your GPA if you have difficulty with the material. id only take it if you have some interest in the subject outside its applicability to the LSAT, because you can pick up the tested FL through self-study.

[stray]

Will do, thanks. Also I have found a course in my school for Intro to Symbolic Logic, which I am assuming much of this falls into...I'm thinking about taking it. Thoughts?

i took a class in Symbolic Logic and really enjoyed it. though only about 10% of what we learned was useful on the LSAT, it made questions with formal logic very quick, because i was used to translating sentences in my head. however, the class can nuke your GPA if you have difficulty with the material. id only take it if you have some interest in the subject outside its applicability to the LSAT, because you can pick up the tested FL through self-study.

Ok, now I am hesitant to take it. I probably won't risk it if it isn't that useful for the LSAT since that would be the only reason I would even consider taking that course.

[Shmoopy]

I took a logic class in the philosophy department at my school and we talked about Baye's theorem more than anything, which isn't on the LSAT at all. Whether you should take this class depends on what it covers. A basic intro is sufficient and I imagine most classes would be overkill.

[stray]

I took a logic class in the philosophy department at my school and we talked about Baye's theorem more than anything, which isn't on the LSAT at all. Whether you should take this class depends on what it covers. A basic intro is sufficient and I imagine most classes would be overkill.

Yeah, I'm not going to take it. Definitely not willing to risk my GPA for a class that won't help. Also, Nova mentioned that the I should read the Manhattan bundle over Powerscore. Is that a consensus around here? The reviews are great for the Manhattan bundle and its price isnt too bad, so should I pull the trigger on the amazon purchase?

[scottyc66]

I took a logic class in the philosophy department at my school and we talked about Baye's theorem more than anything, which isn't on the LSAT at all. Whether you should take this class depends on what it covers. A basic intro is sufficient and I imagine most classes would be overkill.

Yeah, I'm not going to take it. Definitely not willing to risk my GPA for a class that won't help. Also, Nova mentioned that the I should read the Manhattan bundle over Powerscore. Is that a consensus around here? The reviews are great for the Manhattan bundle and its price isnt too bad, so should I pull the trigger on the amazon purchase?

Doesn't hurt to work through both PS and M. Consensus around here is that Manhattan is better, especially for people seeking 170+.