August LSAT Parallel Reasoning rolled out lots of "multiple-flaw" stimuluses with answer choices that never quite matched, including some flaws and excluding others.
It was up to us to determine which flaws were "the biggest sins" and worth accepting compared to the other answers, in order to choose the best answer.
Is there any guidance on how to "weigh" these flaws against each other?
Currently, I think it's probably something like:
Conclusion Mismatch > Formal Logic (including Quantifiers/If) Mismatch > Modality > Fallacies > Terminology Mismatch
But this is just how I would do it and I have no idea if there's a better way to do this. A lot of parallel reasoning has tried to make itself diagram-proof on the test by requiring you to weigh flawed answer choices against each other, and I was hoping for some guidance on this.
Other things i noticed from August was that there are some supercharged PAI questions.
5 comments
I know this will sound crazy but I have such FOMO about y'all getting to see these new LSAT questions when I can't.
I really feel you here, the questions felt really strange to me
@niaxain it definitely felt like a different format of test!
@Elijahw I personally welcomed it. June was a bunch of crazy correlation style questions that felt nothing like the 150s, so this test made me feel awesome by comparison. Unfortunately have to do a make up test but am trying to learn what I can in the interim.
@antitrust_fan wdym by correlation style questions?