hahahahahhhhahhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Praying on test day that I get 3 RC sections and one LR section
Took me 30 seconds :D
Sees difficulty >:(
Man. I completely missed the "no sense" part and chose B like an IDIOT! I have to learn to read the entire question.
This didn't feel like a 5-star question but something something practicing for the LSAT actually makes you better something something....
am I cooked
Hi all,
I've been struggling with staying focused even for small drills for extended periods of time (30min lol) periods of time and it is genuinely so frustrating. Anyone else have trouble with focus? I get distracted so easily it makes me doubt myself and future career prospects :(
Almost fell for D but it talked more about consumers and the process. Surprised I got this one so fast!
Side note: America's national parks are one of the most beautiful things the country has to offer. I wouldn't want to privatize the Grand Canyon or Glacier National Park, keeping land like that accessible to all is super important!!
I got this one through process of elimination, but only because the other answers didn't make much sense.
A: I don't think the immune deficiency in the brain matters that much. It shifts the blame from the microglia causing it to the BA protein.
C: this feels irrelevant and also a reverse of the causal effect that we established in the question.
D: Kind of the same problem as A, why are we shifting the blame away from the microglia?
E: Not really relevant - it doesn't mention cognitive decline at all, so why is this relevant?
My biggest opp is me....I didn't realize this was a strengthening question and nearly blew my brains out trying to figure out the answer....
That construction question almost made me give up b/c of the passage length - anyone have any tips on getting over this hump? Whenever I see a big LR question I don't really want to do it lol
Not sure why I didn't go with my gut the first time and chose C. C didn't even make sense when I looked at if after choosing it. What is wrong with me!?
I felt like a damn child drawing the set circles (in different colors sob) from the fundamentals part of the course...but I got it right on the first try! This was a difficult one for sure.
I'M GETTING THE HANG OF IT!!!! Turns out the fundamental curriculum really does help!!
Gah, I initially picked A because I got trapped by the "fundamental knowledge" bit. Glad to see I picked the right answer after some more thinking!
the LSAT makes me wonder if I'm cut out to be a lawyer LMAO (mainly bc I hate taking tests) but so far I see improvement! #iamscaredofthelsat
I feel so freaking cool and awesome....finally getting the hang of this. Time is my #1 enemy but I'm getting stuff more consistently right now :')
I NEED TO STOP SECOND GUESSING MYSELF. AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
4/5. How did I miss the easiest one :(
If only I could apply my prowess with these questions to MBT questions....
I think the bucket analogy might help here - but someone let me know if this is more confusing.
Say we have 4 of A, B, and C. If 3/4 As are in the B bucket, and 3/4 Bs are in the C bucket, SOME As being in C is not super likely. Maybe a few, but the boundary for some is greater than few. You could say "at least a few As are in C" and that would make more sense, but not "some" because that's not necessarily true.
Example: Most hummingbirds are brightly colored. Most brightly colored animals are poisonous. Therefore, some hummingbirds are poisonous.
Discarding intuition, we don't know that some hummingbirds are poisonous just because most brightly colored animals are. Hummingbirds are a smaller set than "poisonous brightly colored animals". We don't know if these two sets overlap in any meaningful way.
Here's my attempt at an invalid and valid argument. Someone correct me if I'm going about it wrong!
Invalid: All peaches have pits. Some pits are rotten. Therefore, some peaches are rotten.
The reason why this is invalid is because we don't know the peach is rotten. It could be because the air had weird chemicals in it, or maybe a bug was hiding in the peach. Simply knowing that some peach pits are rotten isn't enough to know that the peach itself is rotten.
Valid: Some peaches have pits. All pits are rotten. Therefore, some peaches are rotten.
This is valid because we know ALL of B is true. If all pits are rotten and we know some peaches have pits, we at least know some of the peaches are rotten.
wauw......i got it right! normally i suck at must be true/assumption questions so this feels amazing.
Would an invalid version of this argument go something like:
Most oranges grown in Florida are delicious. Most oranges grown in Florida grow in the summer and spring. Therefore, all oranges grown in Florida are delicious and grow in the summer and spring.
Or something like: most oranges grown in Florida are delicious. Most oranges grown in Florida grow in the summer and spring. Therefore, no oranges grown in South Carolina are delicious and grow in the summer/spring.
#feedback would it be possible to provide an example of an invalid argument in these videos?
I'm getting the hang of this!! Lawyers and mathematicians are so particular with definitions and words oh my god
Split method is the cure to my comparative passage blues. I am SOLD!
Did a fistpump IRL, can't believe I got it right