Subscription pricing
Hey all. First time poster here!
I am scheduled to take the December LSAT, but since I registered two months ago, I've decided to shoot for a higher score/better school and take it again in June 2017. I'm currently scoring a 160, BR-ing around 168, and my new goal is 170+. I think I can do this by June, but definitely not by December.
My worry is this: if I score a 160 in December and a 170 in June, will law schools heavily consider the first score and/or average the two? I'm looking at schools like Georgetown, Michigan, Chicago, Northwestern, and I want them to see my best score. On the other hand, experiencing test-day anxiety and getting a feel for the process this December before I do the real deal in June sounds beneficial.
Any Sage advice?
I think there are two things that really trip me up in this problem:
1) As many times as I try to reread it, answer A seems to be saying the opposite of what I thought the correct answer should say. I read it as "unjustifiably presumes that the best way to increase correctness does not hinder survival." But if the author believes that increasing correctness will lead to an impaired ability to survive, and answer A says increasing correctness does not affect survival, how is this answer correct? I know I'm misreading it somehow, perhaps misinterpreting a single word, so any corrections in my thinking would be helpful.
2) Second, I chose answer B because it seemed reasonable to me. JY explains it's wrong because the stimulus requires that no believes change unless you reject previously held beliefs. I might be taking leaps here, but doesn't rejecting a belief inherently require you to accept a new belief? For example, JY thought he was a good cook, but when he killed his friend with poisoned food, he realized his previously held belief was not true. JY must now accept this new belief: "I am not a good cook." (or, at the very least, "I may or may not be a good cook.") If JY does this, he is still following the statisticians' rule, leading me to see B as a reasonable answer.