Discussions

aliciaannesmith49459

Joined: Apr 2025
Subscription: Free

General

•

Thursday, Jun 16 2022

aliciaannesmith49459

Accidentally Used Scratchpaper on Writing Portion

Hi so I forgot about that stupid email they sent out weeks ago that we can't use scratch-paper on the LSAT writing portion. I started to use scratch-paper but then stopped after writing literally 4 words because I realized they provided digital scratch paper.

I need advice: What should I do? Should I email LSAC and make my case? Pray that they didn't even notice? What should I do?

I am literally panicking because I don't want to have to take the writing section again, and I don't want my test to be flagged (I don't want admissions officers to think I cheated or did something bad).

Please help, I'm so scared and I have no idea what to do

LSAT · ⚖ Official June 2022 LSAT Discussion Thread ⚖

aliciaannesmith49459

Saturday, Jun 11 2022

Did you guys receive email confirmation or a status indication on Lawhub that your exam was completed and received without issue? I'm paranoid about exiting the exam correctly. and I can't seem to find any indication whether my exam was received properly.

PrepTests ·

PT133.S1.Q14

aliciaannesmith49459

Wednesday, Jun 08 2022

B is wrong because Waller never makes a claim regarding "all skeptics". Waller is concerned with the "general public".

D is correct because Chin's rebuttal is that within the general public there is a subset of skeptics and that even if ESP is real, not all of these skeptics will be convinced. Thus, Chin would believe that the failure of the general public is NOT good evidence against the existence of ESP, which Waller would disagree with per their conclusion.

LSAT · PSA!! June LSAT Time Slot Sign-ups are OPEN! (Repeat Test Takers)

aliciaannesmith49459

Thursday, May 26 2022

All signed up and ready to go! Best of luck my friends! Quick question- to those of you who successfully signed up for your session, did you get an email confirmation of any sort? ProctorU's site pulled up an Order Successful page after I signed up, but I haven't received email confirmation yet. Just wanted to see if this is normal!

PrepTests ·

PT134.S2.Q16

aliciaannesmith49459

Thursday, Apr 14 2022

The worst part is I picked A originally but then switched my answer because A didn't explicitly mention the belief in unicorns being false >:(

PrepTests ·

PT134.S2.Q14

aliciaannesmith49459

Thursday, Apr 14 2022

Okay here's why C is the correct answer choice (I initially picked A).

The hypothesis is centered around individual students' performances. I.E. the student against another version of their self. The hypothesis is saying that on an individual basis, the more a student studies, the better their chance is at receiving a higher grade [compared to what they would have received if they studied less].

The conflicting information offered is that the students who spent the most time studying did not earn grades as high as those who studied less. But this information is irrelevant because it is comparing across students rather than focusing on individual performance improvement.

It's not a competition, we are not concerned with comparing the students to one another. The hypothesis is not saying that studying the most will guarantee one gets the best grade amongst their peers. Maybe other students have more efficient studying methods, or they just have a natural aptitude for that subject.

EX: Maria used to study for only 1 hour a week and she was a B student, then she tried studying for 3 hours a week and became an A student. Whereas Tony used to study for 2 hours a week and was a C student, then he studied for 4 hours a week and became a B student. See how if each student studies more than they used to, their grade improves? But holding true to the OG hypothesis, Maria studies less than Tony and gets a better grade than he does (because she's a naturally smart cookie).

The hypothesis is not comparing across students, it is comparing students to other versions of themselves. Ergo, C is the correct choice.

PrepTests ·

PT103.S1.Q15

aliciaannesmith49459

Tuesday, Mar 15 2022

The whole "Five drops..." part of the question stem really threw me off and as a result I picked A. I figured that people would use more than five drops, be mad if it didn't work, then ask for their money back. But on further review, and after listening to JY's explanation, I get how A is irrelevant and doesn't really help strengthen the conclusion.

PrepTests ·

PT104.S1.Q18

aliciaannesmith49459

Tuesday, Mar 15 2022

Okay I picked C initially and was so angry when I was wrong but now I get why it's wrong.

The conclusion is essentially stating that motion sickness is caused by conflicting information. If you are in a moving vehicle, your ears indicate that you are moving, and you look out the window and see the things that you are passing by, this is all confirmation that you are in fact moving. This could have strengthened the argument if the ears didn't indicate you were moving, but they did, so this answer choice is wrong.

Hope this helps anyone else who is confused/angry that C is not correct

PrepTests ·

PT109.S1.Q20

aliciaannesmith49459

Wednesday, Mar 02 2022

JY your whale painting was great

PrepTests ·

PT103.S3.Q24

aliciaannesmith49459

Wednesday, Mar 02 2022

Okay so here's my understanding of why E is correct:

The question stem states that the "average price paid for a new car has steadily increased". Then the conclusion is essentially saying that given this information, we can assume that individuals are buying cars that are more expensive than they were 25 years ago. It's assumed in this argument that individuals are therefore the ones driving up the average price paid for a new vehicle.

BUT the support for this conclusion can be weakened if we introduce the idea that it's not individual purchasers that are driving up the average, ergo someone else is buying new and expensive cars and they are the ones driving up the average.

For example, maybe companies are buying new cars for their executives and they buy brand new Teslas, Mercedes, or BMWs every two years. Thus driving up the average price paid for a new car over the last 25 years.

Answer choice E. introduces/implies this idea by stating that less individual purchasers are buying new cars than they did 25 years ago.

PrepTests ·

PT103.S3.Q24

aliciaannesmith49459

Wednesday, Mar 02 2022

Weird confession but I find JY's voice so soothing. Is this LSAT prep or ASMR?

PrepTests ·

PT106.S2.Q17

aliciaannesmith49459

Friday, Feb 25 2022

Initially I got this question wrong, but now I see why E. is the correct answer.

Objection: The market will regulate itself. We do not need the government to make decisions for us, consumers and the businesses they buy from will make the correct decision.

E (correct answer): Civilians' most immediate concern is personal financial expense, so as long as there's still demand for cheap vehicles that happen to be fuel inefficient, then there will be no change/decision regarding fuel efficiency. Ergo, the market cannot be relied upon to make the decision here, and this best undermines the objection.

A- Supports the objection: Society may not make the necessary changes "all at once"- but eventually it will make the changes, they will occur over time.

B- Supports the objection: Civilians will become aware of their energy usage through their purchases and will want to purchase the most energy efficient thing

C- Does not directly undermine objection: A new type of fuel is introduced and we may need changes to infrastructure to fully use it. Okay, but who is introducing the fuel? Govt. or private sector? Also it's implied that the government is just making the infrastructure changes. Maybe the fuel is introduced through the private sector, i.e. the market. but then the govt. makes the infrastructure changes. This answer is REALLY tempting, but in the end it does not undermine the idea that decisions on energy use are best left to the market. It's kind of irrelevant because it has more to do with action/implementation than actual decision making.

D- Blatantly supports the objection: Civilians will become aware of their energy usage/cost through their purchases and will want to purchase the most energy efficient thing/create an energy efficient solution.

PrepTests ·

PT101.S2.Q1

aliciaannesmith49459

Thursday, Feb 24 2022

This was a tricky question but I ended up picking B in BR. I initially had the same logic you had but then I realized that the premise specifically mentions the heart while the conclusion makes the general statement: "It's safe to drink coffee".

The idea that it is "safe to drink coffee" solely on the grounds that coffee is not bad for the heart does not mean that coffee in and of itself is safe to drink. Heart health is not an indicator of overall health. For example, maybe coffee is really bad for your liver and your digestive system. Shouldn't a coffee drinker be aware/cautious of those things as well instead of just looking after their heart?

PrepTests ·

PT102.S4.Q11

aliciaannesmith49459

Thursday, Feb 24 2022

Ugh. I'm annoyed because I selected D initially but in BR changed my answer to E.

PrepTests ·

PT107.S4.Q9

aliciaannesmith49459

Thursday, Feb 24 2022

During the timed segment I chose C because I didn't read the question thoroughly, but in BR I selected D. D is the answer because it most clearly explains why a switch to oil would be possible or even favorable in the future.

This question is fairly simple in my opinion but what tripped me up was a combination of time constraint and the question length. But I know that as we continue timed problem sets, I'll improve :) we all will!

PrepTests ·

PT105.S2.Q4

aliciaannesmith49459

Thursday, Feb 24 2022

I got this one wrong but now I see why! This is classic case of correlation /causation.

- Question stem says that THC, "an ingredient found in marijuana" inactivates the herpesvirus. (HSV)

- Other experiments found that inactivated HSV cells can convert healthy cells into cancer cells (thus causing cancer)

- Conclusion: The use of marijuana can cause cancer.

The argument here relies on the logic that because of this one potentially carcinogenic ingredient in marijuana, marijuana as a whole can cause cancer.

But from the question stem we know that THC is just an ingredient. THC /= marijuana, there are other ingredients. So what we have to attack here is the idea that this one ingredient makes marijuana carcinogenic.

B. is the only answer choice that adequately does this.

PrepTests ·

PT106.S2.Q3

aliciaannesmith49459

Wednesday, Feb 23 2022

I initially picked E but during blind review changed my answer to B. Here's what led me to pick B:

The author's argument uses the accident fatality rate of triple trailers on western highways and compares that to the national rate of accident fatalities in other commercial vehicles. Upon initially reading this, it's easy to see why comparing western vs. national is flawed logic, those are two completely different highway systems. The way to weaken this argument lies in the fact that the author is using western highways specifically to support their conclusion, thus we pick the answer that attacks the use of the western highway statistic.

PrepTests ·

PT102.S3.Q12

aliciaannesmith49459

Wednesday, Feb 23 2022

I had the same experience as you! At first I wanted to go with C but then I realized that Debbie's argument never mentioned concern with pricing or the time it would take to perform the pain protocols.

When I really looked at Debbie's argument during blind review I noticed that her argument comes down to human beings' ability to communicate with their doctors and fully comprehend the potential pain their doctor is warning them about. The only answer that weakens this idea of humans being able to communicate with their doctors is if the human is an infant!

PrepTests ·

PT102.S2.Q19

aliciaannesmith49459

Monday, Nov 22 2021

Not gonna lie I'm kind of miffed that the answer isn't C. We literally have NO support that adults mammals play or exhibit playful habits. Whereas for B., yes non-mammals aren't mentioned in the passage, but I feel like we can infer that they don't engage in play that serves the same function as mammals do. I.E. why would a baby fish play the same way that a baby mammal does? They're two different things.

I now get why B is the answer, just needed to vent what my mistake was and why it made me mad.