oh lord im cooked

lol love this

the median gpa at the law school my friend is at is 4.0.......... bruh

3/3 let's go!! I was slow on them but that's alright for now lol

that took me 8.5 mins and I still got it wrong lmfao but in blind review I got it. sighhhh lots and lots of grinding ahead

I thought I understood but now it's clear I do not

I keep seeing "no" and thinking it is group 4 before continuing and seeing a different indicator such as "without." urgh lol

If y'all are confused, it helped me to think of an imaginary example as to why the logic is invalid to say that Kumar will be marked late.

Let's pretend he arrived 17 minutes late, but with a doctor's note, which the school accepts to mean he is not counted as late. He can ONLY be counted late if he is 5+ minutes late, but he is not REQUIRED to be counted late--here because of our made-up doctor's note. The logic does not ABSOLUTELY DEMAND he be marked late, as it can easily be proven broken with our example. :)

This made sense, I just had to catch myself wanting to make the most common mistake on the LSAT! I wrote younger than 40, which is NOT the negation of 40!

wait this is so cool!

If y'all are taking notes in Google Docs and are on a Max, Command and Comma is the shortcut for subscript!

I am excited to learn 'lawgic' as I think this will be really helpful for breaking down questions quickly! :)

Will the premises always be assumed true? like not all turtles are ninjas, but for the test we assume this is the case?

this is horrid

the 5th one is diabolical

oh lord the 4th one was terrible

lmao "4 is pretty straight forward" oh...

This is interesting and true! Academics aren't trying to be pretentious with their complex sentences, it is just normal for them at that point

Makes sense! Yay!

this made me feel like a genius lol. I just ignored everything but the lawgic and got it right and under the recommended time (im ALWAYS over). yay!!!!!!!!!!!!

is it fine for the last one to have the domain be kingdoms in westeros whose economies... etc. ? I don't see value in putting the economic statement in my chain

these techniques are helpful. it's interesting to see where we take different paths--often when I think a kick it up to the domain framework is fitting, you don't, and vice versa. but it all gets to the same answer, so the variability is fine!

I got tripped up on the last one, as it started with "when" and I mindlessly deemed this a Group 1 indicator and said that knowledge was the sufficient condition. I saw the "if" later and realized how it actually works.

I think the first and third frameworks are my favorite. You use lawgic but also don't need to go into every detail with it. It is both clear and efficient. I'm glad to know this is an option, because it makes sense with how I think!

just to clarify, does A and B --> C mean the same as (A and B) --> C? Like the statement is NOT A, also B --> C? The parenthesis existing sometimes but not always is a bit hard to wrap one's head around, especially with any background in math. thank you!

if you are reading this, you got this!! I believe in you!