Subscription pricing
Thank you everyone for your input
PT Questions
jano818dzia683
- Joined
- Apr 2025
- Subscription
- Free
jano818dzia683
Wednesday, Dec 20 2023
Usually when I find myself stuck between two attractive answer choices, I ask myself what each answer choice is assuming & whether it is feeding into my personal bias and outside knowledge of the world.
Often, trap answers are designed to appease your personal assumptions and common sense of the real world.
jano818dzia683
Tuesday, Dec 19 2023
I eliminated answer choice B because I thought "beyond the orbit of Pluto" was too ambiguous. Maybe beyond could mean 1 trillion light years? Who knows? All we know is its beyond Pluto, so my reasoning was that it could be too far to have any affect on Uranus. Am I assuming too much? #help
jano818dzia683
Saturday, Dec 16 2023
How much time do you spend reviewing wrong answer choices? My guess is not enough. You need to revisit wrong answer choices and spend a considerable amount of time reviewing your thought process and where you went wrong.
jano818dzia683
Friday, Feb 16 2024
You have to figure out what learning style is best for you. Are you a visual learner or understand better by reading or listening. I have been studying on and off about a year and feel the same way. I completed both Blueprint prep and 7sage, However, I discovered that reading physical textbooks has helped me internalize the information better. Reading Powerscore bible lessons and actually doing questions on physical paper has helped me better understand the fundamentals than watching videos.
One piece of advice I'd give is to get very specific with the conclusion ( a lot of arguments in the LR section deal with conclusions) and DO NOT GENERALIZE! Try to understand exactly what the author is getting at word for word.
Also, I think most of the LSAT prep is very technical and abstract, and the best way to sometimes approach questions is intuitively. I like to look at the structure of the stimulus (which usually includes background info/context/other peoples argument) and which then the author steps in and basis their conclusion on the information in the stimulus. So instead of looking mechanistically at premise/conclusion indicators like how the lessons plans teach you, pay attention to how the author uses the information in the stimulus to make a conclusion ( and remember the purpose of a conclusion is to be persuasive). This is essentially what logical reasoning is (using information to make a conclusion/explanation/persuasion. etc...) How reasonable an argument is depends on how the information is interpreted and whether the assumptions are warranted or not ( most of the LR questions are flawed) such as, necessary/sufficient assumption, strengthen/weaken, flaw, parallel flaw. So you know you're dealing with flawed args.
So once you start recognizing structural patterns, it's much easier to find gaps in the reasoning.
jano818dzia683
Saturday, Sep 14 2024
Before heading to the answer choices, I was able to formulate exactly the same alternative hypothesis as AC (a), but was confused by the notion of social inertia. I assumed that social inertia includes resisting technological advancement because it would affect job loss, which in turn would affect society? That's why the workers are reluctant to technological advancement. So, I thought AC (a) aligned with the conclusion the author was making, so I chose (e) instead. I guess I thought both concepts (social inertia & resisting technological advancement) were the same thing. #help
jano818dzia683
Monday, Jan 08 2024
#help #feedback
Is there a slight equivocation in answer choice (b) "questioning a claim supported by statistical data by arguing that statistical data can be manipulated whatever view the interpreter wants to support"
Initially, I thought that the term manipulated in this answer choice suggested that the individual is manipulating the numbers vs percentages to show an overwhelming percentage when the amounts are low. But this can also be interpreted as actually manipulating the statistics to be inaccurate of the actual result.
So I thought that Gamba was responding by asserting that although the percentages appear overwhelming, the actually amounts are just low and Munoz is manipulating perception vs reality to push his narrative.
jano818dzia683
Saturday, Jan 06 2024
Before approaching the answer choices, I anticipated something along the lines of people will maybe recycle less if the pick up is bi-weekly than weekly b/c perhaps they run out of space in their bins and decide to throw away the recycling material in the trash or decide to recycle it themselves. Therefore, the idea of picking up the bins weekly would eliminate this possibility & the city would collect more recycling material thereby increasing revenue.
I guess this speculation rests on the assumption that people will always constantly have recyclable items. Nevertheless, this thought process directed me towards the right answer.
Thoughts?
jano818dzia683
Friday, Jan 05 2024
Maybe try untimed practice & highlight the premises and conclusion with different colors. This method helps to visualize the argument better and see any potential gaps.
You should learn to adopt a critical/skeptical approach when approaching most LR question (especially flaws) since you know the argument is already flawed. Sometimes a simple question such as, "what's wrong with this argument" might help. Mike Kim's LSAT Trainer is a great book that has helped me approach flaws and invalid arguments from a critical perspective.
As for NA, bear in mind that the argument in the stimulus is flawed. Your job is to figure out what the author is taking for granted when reaching their conclusion. The AC usually contains the flaw.
I think it depends mostly on context. Even though it may be improper to submit both requirements, does not mean you cannot do both. I think inclusivity comes down to how possible an action is. In this statute, perhaps an overzealous attorney/client fulfills both requirements. May be weird, but logically speaking, is possible.