- Joined
- Apr 2025
- Subscription
- Free
Admissions profile
Discussions
Hi guys!
I've been super into podcasts as of late and I thought it'd be great to add something LSAT related to my arsenal. This could encompass explicitly LSAT/Law School related podcasts and anything else along the lines of: mediation, psychology, philosophy etc. I'm up for any suggestion really!
Side note: Feel free to include fun stuff too! Balance is key!
I'm interested in joining also. Can someone indicate whether or not this group is closed?
Hi guys,
@rdelltownsel637 @jimmyrivera201123 just pm me your # and I’ll add you to the group chat. We had our first meet up at the Ny PL but there wasn’t much space at the location we were looking at. We’re looking into using someone’s conference rooms at their job in manhattan.
Hey @vernicelove143993 PM me your # and I'll add you to the GroupMe we're looking at this Thursday May 2 after 5pm. We are completing Section 4 of PT49 and BRing at the library and going over it together.
@rdelltownsel637 LOL I just have to put this out there, your username makes me laugh so much! I can only imagine showing up and saying, "Hey are you Mr. buttons?"
Ok ok lol, lets set up a group me and then others can join if they'd like. I think some of the CUNY's allow the public to use their libraries. Hunter College might be a good middle point for the boroughs. PM me with your #
@skhan012018154 PM me too!
Hi all,
I work on 7th ave and could totally meet up after 5:30pm. Is there a group me for this? I'd love to get involved.
chenoabailey93611
Example of "It is used to illustrate the general principle that the argument presupposes"?
Hi guys,
Not sure if this is normally asked but I want to ask anyway because I want to know what it means when I run into it. Can someone reference an example of this and what it essentially means in an argument part question? Its such a simple term but I can't conceptualize this into words. Thanks.
For reference I ran into this in 27.1.17
I couldn't agree more with the above sentiments. I initially started with 7sage but I needed a different less methodical way of explaining. I'm not great with memorizing and recalling certain key words JY tells us to pay attention to and the Trainer helped me see the bigger picture in terms of how I should be approaching a question. It helped provide a holistic overview. I can't thank it enough. Coming back to 7Sage, it has really helped me focus in on what JY has been saying all along.
I know this is three days late, but just in case you need more convincing. I'm on lesson 9 in the LSAT Trainer and it has SIGNIFICANTLY helped solidify what JY teaches on here. I tried to look at Power Score but it wasn't for me.
This is great!! Wish I knew about this during undegrad! Bump!
@jkjohnson1991823 Thank you! There were so many people in that thread, I just don't think people know how to get added to the group. Are we going to use that platform 7Sage uses for their webinars?
About 83 comments later, I haven't seen any concrete study calendar or plan. Is anyone spearheading this study group? How does that work? I think that for the November group we should get started as soon as possible. Who's the person in charge? How do people normally get this started?
This is what someone told me:
Weakening ------ RRE
This one is a little harder to see so I'll use an example.
There are 100 people on a cruise ship and half take Dramamine, a pill that's supposed to help with sea sickness. Despite this, of the 50 people who took Dramamine, 13 reported symptoms of sea sickness. Of the 50 people who didn't take Dramamine, only 2 reported symptoms of sea sickness.
That's a classic setup (stimulus) for a RRE question. What's the resolution? You have to think about who would take Dramamine in the first place. Likely those people who anticipated getting sea sick. No one pops pills for fun... wait, never mind. Anyway, the resolution here is that people who are more inclined to get sea sick are more inclined to take Dramamine in the first place. If those 50 people instead did NOT take Dramamine, then likely all 50 would have gotten sea sick. That's the classic reconcile answer choice.
It's very easy to make this into a Weakening question. We just have to add a silly conclusion. For example: Therefore, Dramamine is ineffective in preventing sea sickness.
Previously, we didn't have a conclusion so there was no argument. Now we have a conclusion so we have an argument. How do we weaken this argument? We say the same thing. People who are more inclined to get sea sick are more inclined to take Dramamine in the first place.
Are you getting principle questions mixed up with necessary assumption questions? Please specify.
Can someone translate this to Lawgic? Incredibly helpful btw!!
Maybe a weekly #help discussion post where people who aren't getting the help they need can ask away? Also, maybe a weeding out of #help questions that can be easily answered in the CC.
I got a pet to help with my anxiety. I'm not advising this as a cure for depression and anxiety but what I hope you take from this comment and all comments is that you **CAN** find something in order to combat these things in your way. Through trial and error find what works for you.
Welp I guess that does it! Thank you guys. @drbrown2259 @gulnaranzar530