F*** PT6-S2-Q20 Forum
-
- Posts: 279
- Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2014 10:56 pm
F*** PT6-S2-Q20
SUCH INCOMPREHENSIBLE BS!!!! EVEN MLSAT POASTERS THINK ITS STUPID AS FUUUUUUUU https://www.manhattanprep.com/lsat/foru ... t1614.html
Last edited by I<3ScholarlySweets! on Thu Dec 25, 2014 4:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
- mornincounselor
- Posts: 1236
- Joined: Sun Apr 21, 2013 1:37 am
Post removed.
Post removed.
Last edited by mornincounselor on Mon Nov 09, 2015 1:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- PeanutsNJam
- Posts: 4670
- Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 1:57 pm
Re: FUCK PT7-S2-Q20
The problem is that "self-interest" can be interpreted as in the interest of the policy advisor, which is what I first thought and automatically eliminated C. It's a very poorly worded answer choice. All the others are wrong for much more obvious reasons, so imo it's a poor question.mornincounselor wrote:You mean PT 6? That's what your link is about.
The question is a method of reasoning one. The first sentence seems to be the key, the rest is background.
This freedom of speech, in addition to being a basic human right, is also "the only rational policy" for us to adopt.
The author is telling us this thing (freedom of speech) is both a moral ideal (basic human rights) and a pragmatic self-interested approach.
She is coupling these two things.
-
- Posts: 279
- Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2014 10:56 pm
Re: FUCK PT6-S2-Q20
mornincounselor, WOOPS! I did mean to put PT6. I changed it.
PeanutsNJam, I know we mostly disagree, but thanks for agreeing with me. This question made absolutely no sense when I was doing it under timed conditions. I hoap the February LSAT doesn't pull a fast one like this.
PeanutsNJam, I know we mostly disagree, but thanks for agreeing with me. This question made absolutely no sense when I was doing it under timed conditions. I hoap the February LSAT doesn't pull a fast one like this.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login