@ I've recently become discouraged at the pace of my preparation. Thank you for renewing my faith in this process. The advice you offer here, and elsewhere, is invaluable.

Congratulations to all selected. I'm hoping for better luck on seven!

@ said:

I'd be shocked to see anything like this on a contemporary LSAT though, so let's hope this discussion is just an interesting hypothetical!

Indeed - let's hope! Thank you for your help!

Thanks, @! It just felt weird to be able to infer these things. It seems that disregarding the existential fallacy has implications of its own, which I hadn't thought of until seeing this argument form.

PS - that picture is hilarious.

Ah, I did miss the "can" from the original statement, didn't I? That makes sense. It seems that I have more reading to do: modal operators. Thank you, @, for taking the time to respond at length. I much appreciate it.

I would love to be entered into the lottery - thanks!!

I'm in the midst of a similar gap, and I cannot recommend this approach enough. Not only will you ensure that you'll be able to maximize your score, and thus your chances that you'll be able to attend the school of your choice, you'll grow personally, too. The reading and writing and personal exploration that I've done in my leisure, when I'm not studying, has been invaluable. Take that year - or more, if necessary - with confidence. You won't regret it.

Thank you both for your input, @ and @! Both of you provide great advice and thoughtful responses throughout the forums, and I appreciate your responses here.

Let me ensure that I follow, @. Forgive me if I don't; I don't have a background in logic, although I'm interested in learning as much as I can.

From what I've gathered from your post and from Stanford's discussion of the matter, which is at times esoteric, generic statements express generalizations of individuals of a kind or predicate properties of a kind itself, but these statements aren't quantified - that is, they lack determiners or adverbs of quantification and do no thus provide specific information about the number of members of a kind that have the property or characteristic that is attributed to that kind. Although Gen is an operator that functions like an adverb of quantification, it is not considered a quantifier because it cannot convey how much or how many. In this sense, it cannot be said to share meaning with any of the other quantifiers, such as "all" or "most" or "some," and cannot be equated with them. Generic statements, furthermore, cannot be simply considered universal statements because a generic statement can be true with exceptions - unlike a universal statement.

For these reasons, I cannot infer from the generic statement "small animals move more rapidly than large animals" that all small animals share that ability. The quantity of small animals that move more rapidly than large animals is uncertain. Thus, I cannot equate the original generic statement to the universal statement "all small animals move more rapidly than large animals." So in negating this generic, we simply negate it to "it's not the case that (gen) small animals move more rapidly than large animals," from which we can infer that an unspecified quantity of small animals must either move equally rapidly or less rapidly than large animals.

Am I on the right track? Would you add or correct anything? Thank you for sharing your knowledge! Generic statements are quite interesting, indeed.

I suppose my only qualm with this question is this: just because the sculpture is unpopular doesn't mean that the public feels it isn't beneficial. Perhaps they hate it but recognize the beneficial nature of all art, regardless of whether it's well received. We simply don't know whether the public feels it's beneficial or not, and it seems the argument is assuming the equivalence of popularity and perceived benefit, isn't it? Would love to hear input on this. Thanks!

Also, if you like classical rock 'n' roll, such as AC/DC or Led Zeppelin (among a litany of others), you should check out Greta Van Fleet. They've crafted a classical rock sound with an astonishing similarity. When I heard them, I couldn't believe they were a contemporary band.

For R&B artists, I'm surprised Frank Ocean hasn't been mentioned on this thread--that is, if I haven't missed mention of him. Beyond Frank, you should look into Moses Sumney's new album, Aromanticism, which draws on R&B and neo-soul influences. James Blake's The Color in Everything album is also phenomenal, and it features a more electronic-focused R&B sound. There's also Sampha, whose Process album is similarly an electronic approach to R&B, though with more soul influence. Sampha collaborated with some big-name artists in the industry as a producer before embarking on a solo career. Oh, and I'd be remiss if I didn't mention Anderson .Paak, whose Malibu album I couldn't stop playing for a year.

For indie-pop artists, I'd recommend Rainbow Kitten Surprise's new album, How to: Friend, Love, Freefall, which flirts with indie-pop and hip-hop genres. Along the same lines, in that they have a similar sound, I'd also encourage you to listen to Magic City Hippies' EP, Hippie Castle EP. (I am not kidding about those names.)

If you listen to folk and alternative, my favorite artists, by far, are Bon Iver--who also, in a tangential but somewhat related note, collaborated with James Blake on his The Color in Everything album and has other collaborative projects in Volcano Choir and The Shouting Matches--the Fleet Foxes, and Andrew Bird. I'd recommend everything by these artists, though the Fleet Foxes' Helplessness Blues and Bon Iver's Bon Iver album were, and remain, particularly important to me. They both grapple with how to make meaning and sense of the world, and I listened to those albums at a time where that exploration resonated with me.

Thank you, @, @, @, and @ for your responses. Each provided me with a different perspective from which to think about the issue. You've steered me back on track. I hadn't been thinking about this properly. But I've spent far too long thinking about this today, so it's time for a break! Thank you all for your time!

We are told that much of today's literature is inferior. This is because most authors are intellectually and emotionally inexperienced, and their works lack intricacy and focus on the significant. However, the author says, H's novel is promising because it shows a maturity, complexity, and grace that exceeds her earlier works.

Most of the answer choices try to bait you into comparing H's novel with other contemporary works. However, we cannot do this. All we know is that much of today's literature is inferior because it lacks three qualities that characterize good literature. And all we know about H's new novel is that it is promising because her latest work has three qualities that exceed her earlier works. It is promising, but we do not know whether it qualifies as good.

(A): unsupported; we do not even know whether H focuses on the significant in her latest novel. We cannot conclude this statement from the information given.

(B) unsupported; we are not given any information about whether contemporary literature contains grace. Thus, we cannot conclude this statement from the stimulus.

(C) unsupported; we are not given information about today's standards. The author simply says that contemporary novels lack characteristics of good literature. We do not know what characteristics define "today's standards." We cannot conclude this statement from the information given.

(D) unsupported; H's novel is merely characterized as promising. We are not told whether it was "good literature" or not. Thus, we cannot conclude that it is better than most of today's literature. (If we had been told that it qualified as good literature, I believe that we would be able to make this conclusion. Correct me if I'm wrong!)

(E) supported; ah, yes. We know that good literature has intricacies and focuses on the significant. We know that H's latest novel is more complex, which is a synonym of "intricacy," than her past works, so we know that she has at least one property of good literature to a greater degree than she did earlier.

@ I think so, or maybe it was just the name of his carrot. Perhaps his name was George Washington? My memory eludes me. Perhaps I'll get a tattoo of that quote and just attribute it to whomever I want.

Haha, there's no need to apologize. A great friend of mine has a similar sense of humor. He'd always say, "In the great words of [some historical figure], [some quote that wasn't at all attributable to that figure]."

@ Hahaha, interesting. I've heard that line attributed to Socrates, although somewhat apocryphally. Who knows. I'm glad someone else can confirm this phenomenon. How odd it is!

I've certainly received many, if not all, of the comments on this thread at some time or another. I haven't determined the date on which I'll write the LSAT, and this seems to make my acquaintances more concerned than I am about it. (My close friends and family have been unbelievably supportive and understanding.) So in an effort to make the perfunctory exchange of pleasantries in passing conversation more bearable, I've begun to tell these individuals that I have, in fact, scheduled a date on which I plan to take the test. For some reason, this gives them some form of comfort that I don't quite know how to describe. Invariably, they nod their heads and say, "Good! I'm glad to hear that. I know you're ready! You'll pass!"--or something similar and to that effect. It's as if telling them that I've set a date gives them closure, as if it quells some fear or concern that they have for me (that I don't have for myself) and keeps their uninformed opinions at bay. However, if it surfaces in this empty exchange that I haven't set a date, their concern rises and I'm pestered with questions for, on average, 15 to 20 minutes. Cue the comments above. (I'm not bitter about this at all, I swear.)

Thank you to everyone on this forum and for the 7Sage culture in general. I dig this slow and steady approach.

I don't see a problem with using any word that captures what you intend to convey. Rather, I think an appropriate question to ask yourself might be: why am I writing about rigmarole in my personal statement? Is this pertinent?

Thank you, all ( @ , @ , @ , @ , @ , @ )!

If I'm synthesizing your responses properly, it seems as though one's university and one's major may exert some influence on the number itself, though we cannot know exactly how much influence or to what schools this influence truly matters. But there are many other factors that schools consider in the admissions process: LSAT score, age, etc. So in short, I should simply relax and focus on the factors that I can control. And as @ said, I shouldn't let anyone discourage me. (It seems everyone has an opinion on law school, whether they intend to attend or not, lol.)

Thanks again, all. The 7Sage community rocks!

Ahh, that makes sense, @! Thank you!

Thanks, all! ( @ , @, and @).

Yesterday, I received some misinformation, it seems, that alarmed and discouraged me. As a result of youthful apathy and listlessness, I didn't attend the most prestigious university. But I kicked it in gear there, so I'm glad that such youthful decisions won't continue to be held against me (or anyone else, for that matter).

Thank you all for clearing up the misinformation that I received - truly!

Hey, hey, @! Congratulations! You've earned it.

For some reason, I have to shrink the document to fit it on the page--if I print it at 100%, it pushes things onto another page and fractures the continuity of the document--but this leaves a one-inch margin surrounding the entire document. I can view the document as it is supposed to look, but when it comes time to print, it isn't printing as it should be. Is anyone else having this problem, and if you were able to circumvent it, how did you do so? @, any thoughts?

After sleeping on an air mattress for nearly two months (long story), I also struggled with back pain, and from your post, I can tell that our struggles were similar (although I am nowhere near 6' 8"). It was intolerable; I couldn't sit still. It was affecting my concentration and my study habits. I received a life-changing recommendation that I'll pass along to you: see a chiropractor (if you aren't already).

I know that this profession carries with it a certain stigma, largely because of the relative ease with which one may be admitted to chiropractic school and the wide gap in the quality of professional care that results from this practice, but there are many studies that have demonstrated that chiropractic care is an effective way to ameliorate, or even resolve, lower back pain. (If you are interested in reading some of the articles with which I am familiar, PM me and I'd be more than happy to send them. A quick search on Google Scholar or of your school library will also suffice.)

From a more personal perspective (read: anecdotal evidence), I started seeing a chiropractor twice a week for a month, and thereafter, my lower back pain was entirely resolved. Chances are, judging from the explanation of your posture and from the fact that the LSAT is a largely sedentary endeavor, your spine may be misaligned--or "subluxated," as they like to term it. They'll work to realign your spine, the benefits of which cannot be understated. Most people are initially apprehensive because of the pain that follows their initial visit, but don't worry, your spine simply hasn't been mobilized in that manner for some time. It isn't normal to have a subluxated spine. But there are growing pains associated with realigning it.

In choosing a chiropractor, I'd recommend that you do some research. And by "some," I mean "thorough." Research their satisfaction ratings, particularly. I know that that such ratings are subjective, but in the aggregate, statistical trends will emerge. (For instance, this site has maintained a sparkling statisfaction rating (4.94), and there have been hundreds of people rating it. Happenstance? I think not.) Also, if they try to sell you "packages"--avoid them. Your back pain is unique, and your chiropractic care should be tailored to you.

I ended up writing far more than I had anticipated. I'll end here, but if you have any questions that I didn't address, don't hesitate to PM me.

Does this question provide an instance in which the contextual information is also used a premise to support the conclusion? I'd imagine that this is quite unique (as far as LSAT constructions go),correct?

Congratulations! I'm so happy for you!