When are you taking the LSAT? The best way to improve your time is to take LR sections with the 35 min. time constraint as a hard cap no exceptions.

Am I also reading your post correctly that you got -15 in 1 LR section with a 50 min. time limit?

"to say that a location can’t be East and West of somewhere is “absurd” means you clearly haven’t heard of Antipodes." and "where did I say you shouldn’t say a location is West of somewhere?"

Do you not see the contradiction between those two statements?

Also, I was discussing a consequence of the view you committed to. You are 90% of the way through a very thorough LSAT course. I would hope by now you have come to realize that there are inferences that can be made from a set of statements; there are implications to what you say other than what you directly wrote.

And it seems like you are still very much committed to this view given your pompous Plato quote.

Speaking of Mr. Plato, it's quite ironic you think it is improper divvying up the globe into halves given your earlier quote:

"the misplacing of parts of Continents in hemispheres and incorrect ratios."

Seems sensible to me!

Lastly,

You are confusing the cultural division of west/east with the geographic one, which as I stated earlier, is an understandable error to make. Terms like "the West," "the Westernized World," "Western Society" refer to a cultural divide between west/east but that's not the only divide there is.

British cartographers from the 1500s-1800s made a lot of maps. The maps that got popular and stuck around were those that look something similar to the Mercator Projection. The ones we know and love today nearly uniformly choose to orient the world in the same manner. The center is the same, the up/down orientation is the same, and the land masses are (roughly) the same. Because of these practices people started referring to countries/areas on the eastern side of these maps as "the Far East" and "the Middle East" both of which are naming conventions that still exist to this day.

People all over this page have talked about how they assumed that "the West" refers to the Americas and given everything above, one can see why they would make this assumption. They thought because "east" is primarily used to denote geographic divide that "west" must as well.

Lol. This is the most unnecessary ""actually"" I've seen on 7sage thus far. Using your logic, we should not say that Arizona is west of New Mexico because the earth is a globe and so Arizona is also east of New Mexico, which is absolutely absurd to claim.

We have a standardized way of looking at the world geographically - the Mercator projection - and this allows us to refer to regions of the world according to their location on said projection. It is why you know what region of the world I am discussing when I say the Middle East or the Far East.

Mitch used this same reasoning to make a very understandable error - that the Western world refers to the geographic west rather than the cultural one. It's admittedly confusing because when we say "east"we can the geographic east - Middle East / Far East - yet when we say "west" we mean the cultural west. But just because the earth is a globe doesn't mean that we can't consider things geographically west or east.

I believe you have to make a minor assumption that if there are fossils that were completely destroyed and left no record that our fossil record would thus be incomplete. A complete fossil record would be one that necessarily spans the actual record of when birds and D appeared. It's tough to know what assumptions are safe to make and which ones are not but I believe this minor assumption is one you are indeed supposed to make.

This is the perfect trap answer choice and it's incredibly frustrating. On PM Questions I feel that it is best to circle the correct answer and move on once you found a match in argument form amongst the answer choices. Otherwise you have to map out 6 arguments in total and it just turns into an enormous time sink.

Here, you have the LSAT writers taking advantage of that by putting an incredibly appealing answer choice right at the start in answer choice A. On the surface everything matches up incredibly well: a principle tells us that as A goes up, so does B; a premise follows telling us that X has more A than Y; from this we get a conclusion telling us that therefore X has more B than Y. All of this is identical to the argument we are given in the stimulus.

I just feel like if you don't dwell on the specific wording/implication of "as one gets... one gets..." then you are totally screwed. And I have no clue how to remedy this because almost always it is a complete waste of time to dwell that deeply on the minutia of each answer choice/stimulus.

Can someone explain how I can get better at moving quickly/confidently through these tests while still properly slowing down and catching the subtleties that come up on questions like these?

I know I wrote a novel but I just can't seem to improve on this skill no matter what I do and it's incredibly frustrating.

#help

Obviously I didn't even bother trying to diagram these lunatics while I was going through these questions but I am pretty sure that a diagram of their arguments would look like this:

Whittaker:

Premise: (A Medical Student drops out) → (That Medical Student never has a 2nd year)

Conclusion: there is no such thing as a medical student who drops out before their second year

Hudson:

Premise: (Hudson dies) → (Hudson never has 1 million dollars in his bank)

Conclusion: there is no such thing as a Hudson who dies before he has 1 million dollars in his bank. This can be reworded as "I cannot help but become rich."