Graeme Blake, creator of LSAT Hacks, taking questions Forum

[LSAT Hacks (Graeme)]

....but I can't link to them. I checked with the mods, and I'm not allowed to link to them directly. But I am allowed to tell you they exist. So: they exist.

Hope you like them! I'm pretty sure I've given you enough information to find them, if you're clever Let me know if you can't find them. The site also has explanations for LSATs 69 and 68. Explanations for preptests 67 and 66 should follow fairly soon, I'm making this my major focus now that the heavy tutoring season is winding down.

I'll also take this opportunity to field any questions you've got about the LSAT. I used to have an active "ask me anything thread" but I let it die as I got busy during the run up to the October LSAT. Ask away.

My credentials: former Testmasters instructor, independent LSAT tutor, used to work with 7Sage, moderator of Reddit's LSAT from, author of the book series in my username, and creator of the mysterious website where I've just released the explanations I mentioned.

Edited Title To turn this into a questions thread. Ask me anything. And good luck for those of you taking the December test!

[OVOXO]

could you please explain PT36-S3-Q18

also, what do you think is the best way to approach the final 2 weeks before the LSAT other than PTing and doing thorough review?

Thanks!

[LSAT Hacks (Graeme)]

PT36-S3-Q18. Here's what I wrote in my book:

--------------------------

QUESTION TYPE: Necessary Assumption

CONCLUSION: If everyone accepts themselves as they are (and isn’t dissatisfied with him or herself) then society is unlikely to be happy.

REASONING: No one can truly be happy unless they are pursuing excellence and personal change.

ANALYSIS: This question follows a very standard necessary assumption procedure: They introduce two terms that "feel" the same, but aren't. The argument assumes they are linked. Here the two terms are "pursuing excellence" and "being dissatisfied". The argument is implying you won't pursue excellence unless you're dissatisfied.

That could be true, but it’s something the argument ought to prove.
___________

A. It isn’t necessary. It’s only necessary that no one can be happy if they aren’t willing to change.
B. CORRECT. If people who are satisfied with themselves are just as likely to pursue excellence then they could still be happy. There wouldn’t be any need to avoid accepting yourself.
C. This would weaken the argument. It’s arguing that dissatisfaction increases the odds of finding excellence.
D. The argument seems to be saying that we should never be content with our abilities if we want to be happy. This weakens it.
E. The stimulus doesn’t even mention something being painful to obtain. This is irrelevant. This answer choice plays on outside assumptions that being dissatisfied is painful.
---------------

Did that do it, or was there something else you wanted to know?

In the last two weeks, you should be doing lots of timed practice. And by now you have hopefully identified some specific weaknesses: drill those, while maintaining elsewhere.

(edited to add a line I forgot to include in the explanation)

[The LSAT Trainer]

Nothing in the tls rules preventing me from posting the link, right? http://lsathacks.com/explanations/lsat-preptest-70/

- Thanks for providing this for everyone, Graeme.

[OVOXO]

PT36-S3-Q18. Here's what I wrote in my book:

--------------------------

QUESTION TYPE: Necessary Assumption

CONCLUSION: If everyone accepts themselves as they are (and isn’t dissatisfied with him or herself) then society is unlikely to be happy.

REASONING: No one can truly be happy unless they are pursuing excellence and personal change.

ANALYSIS: This question follows a very standard necessary assumption procedure: They introduce two terms that "feel" the same, but aren't. The argument assumes they are linked. Here the two terms are "pursuing excellence" and "being dissatisfied". The argument is implying you won't pursue excellence unless you're dissatisfied.
___________

A. It isn’t necessary. It’s only necessary that no one can be happy if they aren’t willing to change.
B. CORRECT. If people who are satisfied with themselves are just as likely to pursue excellence then they could still be happy. There wouldn’t be any need to avoid accepting yourself.
C. This would weaken the argument. It’s arguing that dissatisfaction increases the odds of finding excellence.
D. The argument seems to be saying that we should never be content with our abilities if we want to be happy. This weakens it.
E. The stimulus doesn’t even mention something being painful to obtain. This is irrelevant. This answer choice plays on outside assumptions that being dissatisfied is painful.
---------------

Did that do it, or was there something else you wanted to know?

In the last two weeks, you should be doing lots of timed practice. And by now you have hopefully identified some specific weaknesses: drill those, while maintaining elsewhere.

thats great, thanks so much!

[bombaysippin]

Nothing in the tls rules preventing me from posting the link, right? http://lsathacks.com/explanations/lsat-preptest-70/

- Thanks for providing this for everyone, Graeme.

Clever...haha

ETA: Thanks Graeme!

[LSAT Hacks (Graeme)]

Yup, Mike figured out a way around it. It's a reasonable policy by the way. If it didn't exist, all LSAT companies and instructors would have an incentive to post tons of links everywhere. And enforcing a "post some links, but not too many" policy takes a lot of mod work, and requires debate about what is reasonable. Whereas Mike can post a link because he's fairly unlikely to flood TLS with thousands of links to my site.

If a mod spots this, could you edit the title to something along the lines of "....and am taking questions" I neglected to include that part in my title.

[blackbirdfly]

Great resource. Thanks for putting this up!

[bp shinners]

If a mod spots this, could you edit the title to something along the lines of "....and am taking questions" I neglected to include that part in my title.

I've edited the title of my thread before - did they disable that functionality?

[LSAT Hacks (Graeme)]

If a mod spots this, could you edit the title to something along the lines of "....and am taking questions" I neglected to include that part in my title.

I've edited the title of my thread before - did they disable that functionality?

No, they didn't. I am merely a fool for not trying until now Just edited it, thanks.