Garrett_dom

Joined: Dec 2025
Subscription: Core

Admissions profile

LSAT

Not provided Goal score: 175

CAS GPA

Not provided

1L START YEAR

2027

Discussions

Lessons · Negating “All” Statements

Garrett_dom

2 days ago

But if I say that not all dogs are friendly, can we infer, or can we deny, that no dogs are friendly? It doesn't half to be the case but its not outside the realm of possibility here.

Lessons · Skill Builder - Quantifier Translations

Garrett_dom

4 days ago

I know we can infer that when we use the quantifier many, it implies some. But we can not infer the opposite. If some dogs are pets, we can't infer that many dogs are pets can we?

Lessons · Skill Builder - Rules and Exceptions (Embedded Conditionals)

Garrett_dom

Monday, Feb 23

For Q5, can you make the whole thing a conjunction?

First, it becomes:

knowledge is element of a fact AND /(doesn't believe it exists) -> aware if existence -> established.

Then you can technically add another conjunction:

knowledge is element of a fact AND /(doesn't believe it exists) AND aware of its existence - > established

Maybe this is too much work, but for me it kinda makes it simpler that this is just 1 big conjunction.

Lessons · Skill Builder - Rules and Exceptions (Embedded Conditionals)

Garrett_dom

Sunday, Feb 22

Q4 I read the rule as if you have 10 + years of experience then you are supported and the exception if you have more than 50 animals.

Is there an issue with that?

Lessons · Skill Builder - Rules and Exceptions (Embedded Conditionals)

Garrett_dom

Sunday, Feb 22

Does it make sense to focus or use one of the three frameworks that makes the most sense intuitively to you or could there be instances where say thinking about the exception as a conditional statement instead of kicking it up is better?

PrepTests ·

PT112.S1.Q14

Garrett_dom

Saturday, Feb 21

I initially didn't make the connection that if McGuiness wins then someone less qualified won't win. For me it was technically too strong to say something like if MCG doesn't win then Yerxes will win.

To help me bridge the gap, are we saying. "We don't know that Xernes won't win and thus someone less qualified won't win"?

Lessons · Disjunction (or)

Garrett_dom

Saturday, Feb 21

How do contrapositives work with these examples? My lawgic tells me that when we do the contrapositive, we can effectively change the or to an and?

For example

Plan Succeeds-> (Jedi Failed or Amidala Failed)

would become...

(Jedi and Amidala Succeeds) -> Plan fails

Are there caveats to this?

General

•

Edited saturday, feb 21

Garrett_dom

💪 Motivated

Time Management while working full time

Hi all,

I have been studying for the LSAT for about a month now and its going okay.

My biggest obstacle is staying consistent with my studying. I work as a full time consultant and can have long, unpredictable hours.

This week as an example, I thought I could be home by 7:00pm and resume studying but I ended up having to work until 10:00 pm and 12:00 am most days this week. I like what I do but its just difficult to stay motivated after working long hours and stick to a plan when my weeks can be hard to gauge.

I knew this would be an obstacle for me so I'm trying to wake up a bit earlier, to squeeze some extra studying in, and do some longer sessions on the weekend.

Does anyone have any studying regiments or tips on how to balance a slightly unpredictable schedule with LSAT studying?

Regards.

PrepTests ·

PT127.S3.Q11

Garrett_dom

Monday, Feb 16

I wanted to check on the explanation. When it says that in 1990, 10 years ago, sunscreen protected against UV-B but not UV-A but now in 2000 we are protected against UV-A and UV-B, isn't that an weak assumption? I understand the logic and phrasing implies that, but we don't know for certain the in the year 2000, today, that sunscreen now protects against UV-A?