Interested in seeing if anyone in the mid to high 150s would like to do some virtual study sessions. I am taking the LSAT in January and am in CST time zone.
- Joined
- Aug 2025
- Subscription
- Core
Admissions profile
Discussions
Ok, it seems to that I was confusing P3 as the second modern criticism where the author is more involved in critiquing it rather than the author critiquing the assumptions behind both criticisms, with the first modern criticism being in P1. I thought "The earlier criticism" referenced an argument prior to modern commentators, like it was said right after the Victorian period.
I seem to always get these wrong in preptests and timed sections but going through this lesson was easy.
It seems like these can sometimes trip you up under timed conditions when you are trying to figure out the arguments assumptions
Is this the right logic?
Squirrel Monkeys not Extinct = Conservationists Intervened
Forest preserved = Squirrel Monkeys not extinct
Therefore:
Forest Preserved = Squirrel Monkeys not Extinct = Conservationists intervened.
Conservationists don't intervene = Squirrel Monkeys Extinct = Forest not preserved
The premises indicate that both effort to studies and methods appropriate to learning styles are sufficient to achieve broad mastery
The contrapositive of this is that if a student did not achieve broad mastery then it must be that either they did not devote efforts to their studies or were not taught with methods appropriate to their learning style.
The conclusion is that if a student did not achieve broad mastery, then they were not taught methods appropriate to their learning styles; but there is no way we can infer this; because they could have very well not been studying hard.
In order for the conclusion to logically follow, then being taught methods appropriate to learning styles must be sufficient for devoting effort to studies, because then if they did not devote effort to their studies then they were not taught methods appropriate to their learning styles.