Subscription pricing
Is there a cap? Hope I can bring in at least 6, so I can have a sharp point for each logic game and a sharp point for the other sections. I really want to bring 10, just in case my experimental is LG.
PT Questions
jpooch14225
- Joined
- Apr 2025
- Subscription
- Free
jpooch14225
Friday, Feb 03 2017
To put that into conditional logic, IF the backstreet boys don't make you happy, you have NO soul.
BBH -----> S
The contrapositive: if you have soul, the backstreet boys make you happy.
S ---> BBH
You cannot deny the premise to my argument!!
jpooch14225
Friday, Feb 03 2017
This one is by far the best pump up song. If it doesn't make you happy inside then you have NO SOUL!
jpooch14225
Friday, Feb 03 2017
Thanks for the feedback all! Since everyone else is as neurotic as me about bringing enough pencils with a sharp point, I think I am going to be "that person" and bring 20.
jpooch14225
Friday, Feb 03 2017
I find that the hardest questions are those that have 4 very attractive wrong answer choices and one atrociously worded, but still technically correct, correct answer choice. The stimulus is usually pretty straightforward, but the answer choices sink up a bunch of time. What is particularly hard is that I have a terrible time letting the question go. I sink 3 minutes into them and still get them wrong. It's one thing to get a super hard question but let it go after 30-40 seconds, but those questions that seem like they are going to be easy and end up killing you with the wrong answer choices, oh man those ones get me every time.
jpooch14225
Thursday, Feb 02 2017
This isn't a song, but it gets you pumped either way :P
jpooch14225
Thursday, Feb 02 2017
Well alright! I guess I had been practicing LG's with a nub for nothing. Thank God!!
jpooch14225
Wednesday, Feb 01 2017
@staciaglee275 said:
I brought a whole box because I'm paranoid. No one stopped me, so I don't think there's a limit.
How many was in your box? I really just want to bring 10. That should be fine. That with my blackwing pencil sharpener!!
jpooch14225
Tuesday, Jan 31 2017
What a piece of shit passage.
-5 timed, -1 BR. Although I managed to get my score together during BR, I still have no fucking clue what this passage is talking about. I hope I never have to read Primate Visions'.
jpooch14225
Tuesday, Jan 31 2017
@dantlee14842 said:
I think the lovely diarrhea brown of PT 75 is by far the most appropriate color for any PT. Honestly, they should just start using the poop emoji as the cover for future PTs.
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!! I agree! PT 75 will forever be a PT which will live in infamy. This is has got to be one of the funniest things I have ever read on these forums. If I start to freak out on Saturday, I am going to think of this thread to calm me down. Thank you for this, I really needed it today!
jpooch14225
Monday, Jan 30 2017
B is vague, but it only makes reasonable assumptions and would work. I don't think this question is representative of those MSS questions you would see on a more modern LSAT.
jpooch14225
Friday, Jan 27 2017
I ended up just taking a random guess on this one because I was low on time, and I didn't like any of the answer choices. I'm still not entirely convinced that the profit from a convicted criminal's memoirs is sufficient to imply fraud (this is what precluded my choosing E), but this is the best answer choice and this is a principle question. With that in mind, I know the argument does not have to be 100% airtight. Had I realized that under time, I would have been able to see that E, in principle, conforms to the stimulus nicely. We have to make a somewhat reasonable assumption that a criminal who makes a profit off of describing how he was a criminal (think Frank Lucas, Rick Ross, Tony Montana types of criminals who write about how they made millions daily by selling drugs on the street) is making said profit fraudulently. Even though most people associate fraud with being illegal, there are some legal things people do that are also considered fraudulent by some.
I also should have just approached this question more like a PR question. If you look at it through a PR lens, E is the only one that even comes close. This one really played into some my deep biases, and it totally screwed me up. I need to remember that my job isn't to satisfy my biases, it's to answer the question.
jpooch14225
Wednesday, Jan 25 2017
Bumping this for February 2017 takers!!
jpooch14225
Wednesday, Jan 25 2017
@31451 said:
LR!!! In December I nearly died with RC first followed by an experimental RC. Just a wonderful combination :)
OMG! What assholes!
jpooch14225
Wednesday, Jan 25 2017
IDC which is first, I just hope my experimental is last.
jpooch14225
Tuesday, Jan 24 2017
I would strongly advise against this. You want to get the low hanging fruit first.
jpooch14225
Tuesday, Jan 24 2017
What the hell kind of a study is this? People are likely to die? Lol, I think I spent 15 seconds during my timed exam just pondering this alone. Not a hard question, but the weird subject matter did make me stop and think about this weird study for much longer than I should have. My mind kept thinking of a mad scientist giving people lobotomies. Lol, those LSAT authors are coming up with weird ways to make us waste time.
jpooch14225
Tuesday, Jan 24 2017
Couldn't make heads or tails of this one under time, but during BR I think I figured it out in under a minute. This is one of those assumption questions where the correct answer is both sufficient and necessary. When I approached the question like you would for an NA, it was very easy. Negate E and it becomes very clear.
If a dramatic novel can be both great and belong to the science fiction genre, how is the classification wrong?
jpooch14225
Tuesday, Jan 24 2017
@bswise2931 The webinar I was referring to wasn't recorded, it was an in person session. No record was kept. Sorry!
As far as getting better at RC, there are a variety of things that I did:
1. Give RC Priority: at minimum I would do around 2 passages a day, but I would try to hit 4 per day if possible. Really focus on getting familiar with the format of RC passages as they do in fact follow a very formulaic structure. That said, RC on the LSAT is not like any other reading comprehension test you will take, you are learning a new way to do something you have done the majority of your life. It's sort of like driving an automatic transmission car for for 10 years and then having to learn stick shift. Similar, but not the same.
Just like we Fool-Proof LG, do as many RC passages as you possibly can to get familiar with these cookie-cutter passages.
2. If you are in the PT phase, work on timing: take RC in two passes, once to get all of the low hanging fruit and the second to get at those super hard questions. Be OK with a degree of uncertainty. There is no way to be 100% sure on every question, so don't be afraid to concede on a few questions and come back to them later.
3. Become just as effective at eliminating wrong answer choices as you are at finding the correct ones: a good POE strategy can sometimes save you four or five points. Become efficient, not fast.
4. Find an RC philosophy that works for you: I think this is the hardest part of RC. While I took a lot away from JY's "Memory Method" strategy, it did not entirely resonate within me and I was still a little confused about certain things. Explore as many different resources as you need to to find that RC philosophy that 'clicks.' What really helped me was The LSAT Trainer, but I also took away a lot of good tactics from Powerscore's RC Bible. Most people on these forums will tell you that the RC Bibles are worthless, but I found them to be very helpful. IDK, different strokes for different folks, I guess.
5. Find a way to not stress yourself so much: I know this is way easier said than done, but when I allow myself to calm my mind and approach RC from a clear perspective, it really ceases to be the hardest section. Instead of looking at RC as the section that kills your score, look at it as the section with the most low hanging fruit (It's true!!!).
I hope my anecdotes help, and if you have any other questions, feel free to PM me.
jpooch14225
Monday, Jan 23 2017
@jhaldy10325.bains
said:
Although, I have just started studying not too long ago...
Relax, timing is the last thing you have to master. Focus on getting super familiar with the subject matter of the test. Timing will come later.
jpooch14225
Sunday, Jan 22 2017
Thanks for the reply, 180 Bro! Could you explain your rationale for your why you think that if, hypothetically, everything after thus was the conclusion, none of the answer choices would work? The LSAT is about making arguments and I would very much enjoy the opportunity to further analyze a hypothetical with you. Thanks!
jpooch14225
Friday, Jan 20 2017
I found this to be the case as well. The NA questions where the correct answer choice is both sufficient and necessary always get me!.
jpooch14225
Friday, Jan 20 2017
You have it backward, If everything after "thus" was considered to be the conclusion, then D would trigger said conclusion and be the right answer. This is not possible, however, because then we wouldn't have any premises, only a conclusion, and our argument would not have the necessary structure to be an argument.
The conclusion of this argument is that Ms. S should "pay for damages." The only premise is the lines afterward talking about "reasonable expectation."
RED
_
PD
In order to trigger the conclusion, we must link the two concepts via a conditional relationship (lawgically).
A supports this notion perfectly: RED → PD
D only restates the premise and does not allow us to conclude that she should pay for the damages.
This one is big on structure more so than subject matter. I can see where some people would get confused on D and think that it is an assumption that is sufficient to trigger the argument's conclusion. The argument does not explicitly state the Ms. S had any reasonable expectations of damage. However, by strictly looking at the structure of the argument, the correct answer must be a conditional statement that links the only premise to the conclusion. S's expectations about whether or not the column she wrote would lead people to damage the property are superfluous to the greater argument, and therefore, has no bearing.
@jhaldy10325 said:
For me, it's when there's an assumption that is so obvious, we don't realize it isn't actually stated. So something along the lines of:
If we let students use cell phones to look up information during tests, there will be no reason for them to learn and retain vital information. Every test would essentially be turned into an open book test.
The missing assumption is that if a test is open book, there is no reason for a student to learn and retain vital information. This may seem to follow so naturally that we miss the fact that it's not there. This example is actually really conspicuous compared to some of the questions I've seen. If you add in a bunch of fluff and obscure it all with some overly complicated grammatical structures, these can become really challenging.
Those NA questions suck super hard because the assumption is so basically necessary it almost seems irrelevant.