Discussions

fmendez2610472

Joined: Apr 2025
Subscription: Free

General · Test Day Prep Prior to the Test

fmendez2610472

Tuesday, Aug 29 2017

I agree. I like to do a LG game or 2, and about 10 LR questions. Maybe read an article on Economist. Get the brained warmed up so during the exam its ready to go!

General · "Error establishing a database connection"

fmendez2610472

Monday, Aug 28 2017

Ditto

PrepTests ·

PT132.S4.Q18

fmendez2610472

Monday, Aug 28 2017

I'll be a man about it and admit this is way out of my league, probably more so than Jennifer Lopez. But JY is right. I went back during BR, still had no idea and just using intuition got to D. No idea how, but it just sounded right.

PrepTests ·

PT132.S4.Q17

fmendez2610472

Monday, Aug 28 2017

E says that in the 24 year group, those who ate lots of Beta smoked less than those who didnt eat beta.

Beta= No smoke

No beta= Smoke.

This helps to overall explain why Beta food eater performed better than Beta supplemant eaters. Because gives alternate that smoking ( or lack thereof) was the real cause of why Beta eaters had low cancer rates and non beta eater had high cancer rates ( Smokers!). So Really it is smoking, not beta that caused the difference. Now it makes sense 12 year didnt find anything, because Beta has no impact just like 24. 24 was just misguided because didnt account for smoking!

PrepTests ·

PT122.S2.Q14

fmendez2610472

Wednesday, Aug 23 2017

Not a big fan of this question, discarded B simply because of what JY pointed out, it did not specifically mean they developed them. They could have just found sharp branches they used as spears.

That being said, I think the way to get to this answer is by Process of Elimination. I was heavily into D but then saw they emphasized " Who first came to stand" Who cares?

As many have said, this might be a lesson that just because the AC doesn't completely wreak the argument doesn't mean its not the answer. Just casting a doubt could be enough.

PrepTests ·

PT122.S4.Q19

fmendez2610472

Wednesday, Aug 23 2017

Great question that shows one of the tricks the LSAT likes to use.

Stimulus:

Forests just a fragment of what they once were

These barely standing forests are the last refuge for worlds endangered species.

If forest is to maintain all its of its plant and animals, then regular intervention by resource managers necessary.

AC's:

B is the LSAT baiting us to take the assumption that because they said the forest are the last refugee for the endangered species, if there is no regular intervention, most of them will become extinct. But we cannot support this from the information in the passage. All we can deduct from passage is if we negate regular intervention from managers, then forest will not maintain ALL of its plants and animals. Does that say they go extint? No. That says at least some will not survive, which is exactly what A says. So A is correct.

PrepTests ·

PT122.S4.Q12

fmendez2610472

Wednesday, Aug 23 2017

During timed PT got this wrong first time around, picked C. Finished with five minutes extra and went back and got this one right.

I think this is a good example of the 25 for 25 strategy being helpful. If I hadn't had extra time, I would have gotten this question wrong. 2nd look cleared it up for me. Another 5 minutes would have helped me get more right in the section.

PrepTests ·

PT122.S4.Q10

fmendez2610472

Wednesday, Aug 23 2017

A: Is wrong because of one word. Stimulus tells us that creators must be capable of experiencing emotions. A tells us they must have experienced the emotions. Very different.

PrepTests ·

PT122.S3.P3.Q18

fmendez2610472

Wednesday, Aug 23 2017

Can anyone go into more detail on why 18 can't be B?

PrepTests ·

PT121.S4.Q25

fmendez2610472

Saturday, Aug 19 2017

Says 60 different problems. 70% of them fixed in 50 weeks. So it follows that for most people, their problems will be fixed in 50 weeks.

Assumption:The problem most people have are within that 70%. What if of the 60 problems, 99% of people have problem number 1. Within the 70% of problems covered in 50 weeks, problem one isnt fixed. instead, it takes a lets say, 70 weeks.

So now, it wouldnt follow that most peoples problems can be solved in 50 weeks

PrepTests ·

PT121.S3.P4.Q25

fmendez2610472

Friday, Aug 18 2017

Man #25 is something else...I was confident in B because the first paragraph introduced the notion of the radically different formations for the fruit fly and the nematode, and then the 2nd paragraph basically contrasts them. I was like 99% sure on B because of this. I'm still skeptical B couldn't be correct.

But apparently almost everyone picked A. Can someone explain to me why they crossed off B?

PrepTests ·

PT121.S1.Q24

fmendez2610472

Friday, Aug 18 2017

Stimulus: We need at least 30% of support by voters from either joining or donating.

26% willing to join

16% willing to donate.

Do not have the 30% support party needs.

Assumption:the 26% and the 16% are intermingled. So for example out of 100 people, 26 willing to join and out of those 26, 16 are also willing to donate. So in total 26% support. Then it doesnt have the 30% support party needs. BUT If they are separate groups, then 26+16 =42%. Then they have the support needed.

So what does argument fail to consider?

In my words: Fails to consider that 26 and 16 are different groups.

Answer choice E: Some of those who donate (16) do not want to join (26). Basically saying they are not intermingled but different and therefore could reach the 30% necessary.

PrepTests ·

PT121.S1.Q16

fmendez2610472

Friday, Aug 18 2017

I chose D during timed Preptest but during blind review went back and changed it to E because I thought D was too strong with " the most appropriate".

Lesson learned.

If this was MSS I would have been right to discard. But not in this case. E doesn't provide us with the answer we are looking for, which is why do we need to include ethical theory? The only one that does is D and thats why it is correct.

LSAT · People who do 25 in 25 for LR, what is your process?

fmendez2610472

Thursday, Aug 17 2017

Wow I thought I was starting to get really good at LR until I read Sami's comment. Jesus. I got lots to improve on lol

General · Will It help if I prepare for the LSATs while in Highschool?

fmendez2610472

Wednesday, Aug 16 2017

Hey buddy. It appears I'm singing to the choir here, but I agree. At this point what you have to worry about is getting AND maintaining a high GPA. I would also take a couple logic classes. I took one in my undergrad and it really helped me get the fundamentals for this test. Then starting your junior year I'd say, you can start thinking about the LSAT. Best of luck and remember to enjoy college! It's an awesome time.

General · Just starting my Law school and LSAT journey and need advice

fmendez2610472

Tuesday, Aug 15 2017

I have a buddy who just graduated and is doing Patent law. He's very happy, says its a very rewarding field. I wanted to encourage you not to get down on yourself, half this test is confidence. I started at a 143 diagnostic back in January and I'm now at 160. Its been a battle to get this far, but I still have work to do. I might need to go until December for the score I want. With that being said, my suggestions would be to start now to slowly get the fundamentals of the test. IDK if 7Sage would be the best option for you right now because you're 24 months out, and 7sages's top class gives you access for 18 months (true, you could pay to prolong it, but overall I think it would come out to be pretty expensive). So I'd probably start out with the Powerscore Bibles, especially for Logic Games and Logical Reasoning. I'd read the books, learn the fundamentals, come back on here, get a course, go through the CC (Core Curriculum) to brush up on anything, and then just practice, practice, practice through drilling and taking preptests. If you go this route, I have no doubt you can achieve any score you want and get into any law school you want. Best of luck !

[Admin note: Ultimate+ includes 12 months now]

PrepTests ·

PT120.S3.Q20

fmendez2610472

Monday, Aug 14 2017

Really really really dislike this question. Borderline I think it shouldn't have been on exam. Heres my two arguments against it.

1) B talks about a definition. But is the sentence " An unnatural action is either a violation of the laws of nature or a statistical anomaly" actually a definition? In my POE it can be argued they are just examples. Same if I said " A vehicle is either a car or a motorcycle." Am I giving you the definition of what a vehicle is? Of course not.

2) J.Y takes up issue with D because it states " self-contradictory" and JY argues its contradictory, but not "self" because the Philosopher pointed it out, its not the case that the context or people in the context contradicted themselves. So??? the philosopher is saying the statement itself is contradictory ( meaning self contradictory) because an unnatural action cannot happen because it is unnatural.

I really think the LSAT, in attempts to put some curve breakers on the exam and make less people get 170's and up, they put bad questions on the exam that are up to interpretation. Anyways I'm fuming but if someone can argue or show me why my two arguments are wrong please do lol

PrepTests ·

PT128.S3.Q15

fmendez2610472

Thursday, Sep 14 2017

It was down to either A or C for me and I went with C because:

A: " most" was vague and gave a possibility it didn't impact Deer at all

C: With the statement "Hunters kill no fewer deer" I took it as 'Each hunter still kills the same number of deer or more' So then that would explain it for me. IF you had 100 deer hunters back then that killed 5 and now you have 10 deer hunters that kill 7 than about 30 more deer are living and that could be enough to let population rise.

But apparently, what argument was saying was that 'overall, the number of deers killed by hunters is the same now or even more'.

What do you guys think? Is it vague, or am I just trying to make the AC correct somehow?

PrepTests ·

PT120.S1.Q8

fmendez2610472

Monday, Aug 14 2017

J.Y hit the nail on the head for me on this explanation. During timed test, I was between D and E and eventually went with E because time was ticking and I needed to move on. But now I realize D is completely wrong. I thought it was saying the fortune teller didn't realize there wasn't a scientific way of finding out if people have ESP, and that made me think it weakened it because if there is no way to prove its existence, then obviously scientists weren't going to be able to prove it and so the fortune teller was using a faulty experiment as evidence. But knowing Takes for granted =Assumed, it makes much more sense. The argument never assumes there is no scientific method for finding out if people have PSD so its not weakness and we can cross off answer choice D

LSAT · Official September 2017 LSAT Discussion Thread

fmendez2610472

Thursday, Oct 12 2017

@ Honestly, if your goal is just 170 and you got a 168, I'd go ahead and apply now while I'm early to take advantage of rolling admissions. But if you think you can best 170, maybe 172, then I think will be worth it. Either way its already a great score so don't be down on yourself! congrats

General · 'Best of J.Y. moments:' J.Y.'s video explanations that just make your day.

fmendez2610472

Tuesday, Sep 12 2017

Legit just laughing at this thread then said " Ok time to actually study" I turn this bad boy on and get another funny J.Y moment : https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-41-section-1-question-18/

3:00

"I get to go have some delicious cow in my mouth"

LSAT · Official September 2017 LSAT Discussion Thread

fmendez2610472

Wednesday, Oct 11 2017

Wait how can you tell how many you missed per section?

Admissions · What's the word on PS page limits?

fmendez2610472

Wednesday, Oct 11 2017

Question. When you guys are mentioning two page limit... you guys talking double spaced or regular?

Admissions

•

Friday, Nov 03 2017

fmendez2610472

Resume Question

Hi guys!

Quick question for you all. My university offered me a position in one of it's study abroad centers, as an assistant to the program. The program starts in January 2018 and is a big reason why I decided to take a gap year between undergrad and law school. I've spent the interim between graduation and starting work by studying for the lsat and perfecting my law school applications.

Now, I had originally planned to explain this gap year in an addendum but I've noticed a couple school's don't have an option for it and for example, U Michigan notes that it should be instead mentioned in the resume.

So my question is basically how? Can I put it under experience if I haven't even started it?

Or would it be under "Personal" section?

Any enlightenment would be greatly appreciated. Thanks guys!

PrepTests ·

PT133.S3.Q22

fmendez2610472

Saturday, Sep 02 2017

Premise says save a life and exceed expectations were done in the same act.

To be eligible, must be exemplary.

So if someone should recieve award then needs all three:Franklin was Exemplary and in one act saved a life and exceed expectations.

If someone should not recieve award then needs to not be eligible. Why? What about the rest? The rest are sufficient to get award. But if we negate them, we cant say anything about should or should not get award. Only way to do that is negating necessary. If you should reciever award, you have to be eligible first. So eligble must be negated for Penn AKA Not Exemplary.

Why A is right: Does everything explained above.

Why B is wrong: Penn has exlemplary, fails.

Why C is wrong: Frankilin doesnt have exemplary, fails.

Why D is wrong: What about exemplary? We need to know and information is missing. Fails.

Why E is wrong: Penn has Exemplary, fails.

PrepTests ·

PT133.S1.Q19

fmendez2610472

Saturday, Sep 02 2017

Very tricky LSAT. I like it.

Why A is wrong : This would be the answer if our conclusion had been that they did interbreed. Because to interbreed they would have had to at least been able to live in the same time and be in the same place. But our conclusion is that they didnt interbreed. So we dont need this to be true.

Why C is right : The stimulus runs on the inference that homo sapiens and contemporary humans share very similiar DNA's, so much so that by comparing DNA of contemporary humans to neanderthals lets us know something about neanderthals and homo sapiens. So if we negate this, " DNA of homo sapiens is significantly more similiar to that of neanderthals than contemporary Humans" it completely wrecks our assumption and therefore our whole argument. So we need this to be true.

Why D is wrong : For our conclusion that they did not interbreed, do we need them to be completely isolated? No. They can be neighbors but still not interbreed.

Why E is wrong:Does this have to be true for our conclusion to be true? No. This is saying "ANY" similarity means they interbred. So because we have similiarity with mice does that mean we interbreed with mice? No.