My Flaw Game is Weak and Would Appreciate your Advice Forum

Prepare for the LSAT or discuss it with others in this forum.
Post Reply
imbreakinglsatbread

New
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2020 12:26 am

My Flaw Game is Weak and Would Appreciate your Advice

Post by imbreakinglsatbread » Mon Oct 12, 2020 3:12 am

I have major foundational issues in LR I want to address. Actually I have major foundational issues in all of it but I need to start somewhere.

Do you agree with, or like/dislike the approach of identifying flaws first and working the question from there, as the LSAT Trainer teaches? I feel like its solid for most argumentative question types but I am not very good at it at all. To be clear, I'm not speaking about flaw specific questions, but the flaws that are inherent in most of these LR arguments.

Im averaging 145 through 8 pretests. I blind review them all fully, I put about 12-15 hours into each test in review. Since I was blind reviewing the entire test, I didn't circle questions I was unsure of. I finally circled these questions in the very last section of my very last prep test. I had circled 19 out of 25. So, now I'm here feeling I don't need to be doing prep tests right now. I don't think I have built a proper foundation to benefit from blind review.

I used 7sage analytics and input my scores. All the question types I have answered were red. I exhibit not a single strength in logic reasoning. So I need to start over.

I don't seek the specials secrets or a quick fix. I'm ready to do it the old fashion way. I want to develop this skill and I am willing to put in the time and effort. With so many questions containing flaws, it seems to be where I should focus my efforts.

Please help me become a flaw master. What do I do? I feel I know all of the major flaws and fallacies but have difficulty extracting them under a running clock. I will return to all of the argumentative questions from the PT's I have taken and find each and every flaw and how that flaw may interact or not interact in each question and answer choice?

I'm hoping through 8 PT's of this, I can improve at flaws at least a little and continue to improve as I go.

Thanks for reading and any help.

IntellectualMode

New
Posts: 34
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2020 7:16 am

Re: My Flaw Game is Weak and Would Appreciate your Advice

Post by IntellectualMode » Wed Oct 14, 2020 6:09 am

Alright fella, I figure I'll try and offer you some advice to help you out.

To begin with, I'm not sure if identifying the flaws in each stimulus is necessary
to correctly answering all question types - I don't particularly like this approach as a foundation.
My reasoning for this is based on the fact that there can be questions which feature wholly 100% true stimuli, trying to identify a flaw here is a time-waster.

As opposed to taking a flaw-centric approach, first I'd recommend taking a look at the question before you look at the stimulus, so you have an idea as to what you're looking for.

(Some common question types where flaws may be prevalent include -
Flaw, Parallel Flaw, Parallel Reasoning, Strengthen, Weaken and both types of Assumption question.)

NB - TLS can be very contentious about this point on how to approach a question, but this is what works
for me, maybe it'll work for you.

When you start reading the stimulus, consider how the premises link with one another, along with any sub-conclusions and the main conclusion. Comprehension of the whole argument and what it is trying to convince you of is something that will greatly help you, across all question types, especially in pre-phrasing correct answers.

With the actual flaws themselves and their prevalence in questions, this links back to my point on comprehension.

See where a flaw is prevalent in an argument, you can guarantee it is something that means that the main conclusion of the argument does not follow 100% of the time.
If you can comprehend what the argument is trying to convince you of and what evidence it gives in favour of its' main conclusion, you should be able to identify what the prevailing flaw is - it's going to be the reason why the conclusion doesn't follow 100% of the time.

Logical fallacies come in many different flavours, some of which aren't as well documented on, but try the approach I've recommended and see how you feel.

Oh and a final point or two on timing - you first have to walk before you can run. Go through LR sections / questions slowly at first, and make sure you understand what you're on about. Then you can start going and doing it timed and analysing your performance.

Best of Luck.

imbreakinglsatbread

New
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2020 12:26 am

Re: My Flaw Game is Weak and Would Appreciate your Advice

Post by imbreakinglsatbread » Fri Feb 26, 2021 2:20 pm

Someone replied!!

Thank you so much for that thoughtful response. I don't know if you saw the date but I had posted that back in October otherwise I would have responded sooner.

The question stem first or second debate truly is something isn't it?

So, in my post I stated I had major foundational issues and that was true. What I didn't know was that this post was my first step in truly addressing my problems. Like two days later, I bought the LG/LR PowerScore Bibles and spent two full months building my fundamentals. I took a break in late 2020 and just came back February 1st. My first PT since completely restarting was a 161 and I'm fully embedded in the low 160's now. I can only finish 3 games in time. I can solve every game I come across...just not 4 in 35 minutes yet. Those LG points are my path to a 165 which is freaking crazy to even type out.

What's even crazier is I have ran my analytics on my PT's since the PS bibles and I have several other very fixable problems with certain question types across LR/RC. I could actually break well beyond 165. But you know what my biggest extra points opportunity still is?

Weaken questions and......Parallel flaw. So, I have moved past the barriers of the basic flaw into more complicated flaw questions. The true flaw in my flawed Improvement, however, is that I'm still only 75% accurate on basic flaw questions. This is the only thing that has frustrated me, because there is some serious disconnect going on in my mind. I'm not really asking for solutions, I'll get there, I'm more just reflecting.

All of your advice you gave is excellent (as I'm sure you know hehe). I agree the "flaw-centric" approach as you so wonderfully put it, is not necessarily useful at all times. The Trainer is a great book, but he argues that there is a flaw in Ever. Single. Argument. But there are completely valid parallel reasoning questions that aren't flawed right?

But as you mention, reading the question stem first solves the problem anyway. I started with stem first then moved to stimulus first. I'm going to try and go back to stem first now that I have better control on the material. Before I had trouble focusing on the stimulus.

I need to be more aware of sub conclusions because I did miss a question recently (I think it was a weaken question) that I thought it was attacking a premise, but it was really a sub-conclusion. So that lack of attention could create problems for flaws too(and tons of others stuff).

I really like the approach you mention about focusing on what the argument is trying to convince me of. I think sometimes, I can lose that engagement and just be reading words on the screen. I'll be more proactive about that. "Wtf are you trying to convince me of fellah?" (I stole your word. I'll bring it back but if it actually works to kill my flaw problem I can't make any promises)

Your last point about walking before running, yes that took me about two months to understand. I took timed PT's way way way too soon, comically too soon. I had no clue what I was "on about". (Are you British? I have a British uncle and he says "What'you'on'about?" a lot). But now, I know a little about what I'm on about.

I'm in a much better situation since my last post. I'm really going to push my LG to hit consistent mid-160's and consider what next. My goal was 155. But, I came up with a list of 17 things I can improve upon based on my last 4 PT's alone. Many of those things I am really close to figuring out, some not so much but I may actually have a chance to score at a level I would have thought unrealistic in the beginning. Mid-160's honestly already was. But, I know I have so much more to learn and tighten. The funny part is, I am JUST NOW really starting to feel like I'm getting better at this test. It's slowed down a lot.

Anyway, I just thought I'd provide that little update, which you did not ask for, as a thank you for taking the time to give me help. I'm taking away to maintain a focus on what the argument is trying to convince me of. I think sometimes I can get lost in the mechanical processes of id conclusion, id support, etc.

Ok, thanks again and good luck to you.

User avatar
ManhattanElitePrep

New
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2021 8:54 pm

Re: My Flaw Game is Weak and Would Appreciate your Advice

Post by ManhattanElitePrep » Thu Mar 18, 2021 9:25 pm

Hello, to really improve in the logical reasoning section you should take your time and learn paraphrasing as the LSAT test-writers really invoke this in their questions. Its important to spot similar language. Rereading the questions thoroughly always helps. For the flaw section specifically, identify the shift in language and you'll have identified the shift in logic. Pay close attention on the shifting in language in the problem.

Want to continue reading?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Absolutely FREE!


Post Reply

Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”