User Avatar
Doesn'tDrinkPaint
Joined
Nov 2025
Subscription
Live

Admissions profile

LSAT
Not provided Goal score: 175
CAS GPA
3.19
1L START YEAR
2027

Discussions

User Avatar
Doesn'tDrinkPaint
3 days ago

@Doesn'tDrinkPaint sorry sketch, don't want to be thrown to the wolves by any part time comedians on this site

1
User Avatar
Doesn'tDrinkPaint
Edited 3 days ago

@mbmiller Funnily enough I used this exact skit when I sometimes get confused by necessary vs sufficient assumptions lol

3
User Avatar

3 days ago

Doesn'tDrinkPaint

💪 Motivated

The Gang Commits a Logical Fallacy

Hi all! I wanted to share something that might be useful to some of my fellow 7Sagers. It may sound a little ridiculous, but hear me out.

Flaw questions have always been one of my biggest struggles. While most of my progress is obviously due to studying, one unexpected thing that has helped me is the TV show, It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia.

It has always been one of my comfort shows, especially when I want to relax my brain after studying. At some point, though, I noticed that the characters are constantly getting into ridiculous arguments, making outrageous claims, and otherwise acting irrationally, or, you can even say, illogically. I think you can see where I’m going with this . . .

While watching, I began trying to identify the flaws in their reasoning, pinpoint the unwarranted assumptions they are making, or predict how another character will respond to an argument. It might sound hectic, but it has made retaining and applying these concepts much more enjoyable. Since I started doing this, I’ve noticed an improvement in both my understanding of flaws and my overall performance on my question sets.

That said, I would not recommend accidentally binging an entire season under the guise of “studying” (which I definitely have never done). I also wouldn’t recommend doing this while watching with friends unless you want to have fewer friends in the long run.

24
User Avatar
Doesn'tDrinkPaint
Tuesday, Jun 16

D and E also tripped me up but think a simpler way to go about it is by looking at Net Gains/Losses:

As with the stim, the implication of the cost in D is clear: the loss in customer goodwill exceeds any benefit from theft prevention, hence incurring a net loss.

E says that an electronic keyboard IS more expensive to repair than a piano. But what if the piano costs $3000 more than the keyboard, while the repair for the keyboard is only $1000, whereas the piano repair is $999? E makes no assessment as to whether this potential cost leads to a net negative.

2

Confirm action

Are you sure?