- Joined
- Jun 2025
- Subscription
- Core
just a girl trying to get a 175+
Admissions profile
Discussions
no idea what that is in the timeline, especially for competitive schools. is that like just on time? not really early?? are people who apply in december at a disadvantage than those in sept?
was between A and B and couldn't decide. until in was like meh i think they're just not trying to have to write out important story every single time... girl u were WRONG
we dont really know where the lemurs are hiding during the day. maybe they're under the only leaves around. maybe they're trying to blend into a tree branch. we don't know.
what helped me pick B was from the pov of the bird, if i see any movement below, im going to go check it out and see if that's lunch. the fact that there's barely leaves put the lemurs in danger of being seen if they're active. so they're going to save their movement for night. for ex: hunting their own pray, running around, whatever it may be, they're going to save those activities for night when the birds wouldn't spot them.
i definitely did not understand exactly what B was saying but it was the only one that told us when something is harmful (which is what we're trying to justify), so boom ! correct AC
i eliminated A pretty quickly because it talks about B&H's success sparking renewed interest in DNA applications in the construction of nanocircuits. sure, maybe it did do that, but that is not at all relevant of an eventual commercial application of B&H's research. their research is on peptides and semiconductors--anything outside that scope, like DNA applications, even if inspired by them, is not relevant here.
the wording of D also had me skeptical, but like u said anything thats maybeee is eliminated and i also got to D as the right AC by that same thinking of howd they know they were wrong?
i would try to get a few more PTs in at or above your goal score to feel truly ready for the exam, just because theres often the case where you underperform so you want to give yourself that window. but if you feel confident in yourself go for it! just dont pressure/force yourself, youve got all the time in the world
wait i just realized this was pt157. i just scored it today and also got a 179 LOL
i mean if it was a real exam, your exp wouldn't have been scored anyways so i'd be confident in the 179. you could've missed 10 on s4 and still gotten the same score. i think this does count if you also took it under strict test conditions
i will say if your exp was s1-3, i'd be more hesitant to say yes though. and i mean that because test fatigue is a factor and if your exp was, say, s2, you'd be performing possibly better on s3 and 4 because you skipped 2 and didn't lose the energy you would've had to expend
i got this right and eliminated C because i learned from similar weaken questions i got wrong. if you have an AC that could affect both groups you're comparing equally, it won't weaken the effect being observed! C makes you think ohhh maybe thats why group 1 reported on avg 1hr more of exercise/day than group 2, bc group 2 is already highly motivated. okay... but C doesn't tell us how it applies to the group. without that specification, you have to assume this affects both populations equally, meaning if it affects group 2 it affects group 1. yet group 1 still had an increase over group 2... so even of C were true, it does nothing to weaken our conclusion
If you've got a rule/principle, wtvr, A-->B, the counterexample or way to contradict it is A and NOT B. The ethicist does that here with a clear statement of NOT B (can't do something). Because of this A and NOT B hack, we know our A is the same A (ought to). So, you still ought to even though you can't, that obligation doesn't go away.
The ethicist is telling us the principle does not always hold true and gives an example, but the ethicist doesn't end the example with saying "yet they still ought to do so." That part's not explicitly stated, and thus created an opening to weaken the argument. To defend it, you need D because it says: actually just because you can't doesn't mean you ought not to, you still OUGHT TO!
tough question. im glad i understand it now but wrapping my head around it all with no confusion left took at least an hour..
i was really lost on identifying what the conclusion was and exactly what point i was trying to "strengthen." none of the ACs looked great, and i thought the main thing was "if springhill would introduce econ incentives for water conservation, then emergencies could be avoided."
i still wasn't convinced that was the conclusion because the stimulus was worded/structured so weird. i re-read it trying to differentiate fact from opinion. the avoided premise is one thought, but what immediately follows is "actually" that they discourage conservation. and then they tell us why. that was the aha moment for me in seeing that i needed to strengthen that springhill is, in fact, not encouraging conservation. C strengthens that idea because if the threshold is so high that barely anyone is hitting it, then everyone's usage stays the same at a good rate for them, so there's no incentive for them to lower their water utilization (conserve water).
if the threshold were to be higher, where most would now be over it, there's an economic incentive encouraging conservation because households are going to want to cut back due to that hefty per-liter rate
i think C still leads to the same conclusion though that marijuana causes cancer. maybe its doing it in a different way, but that's not what the conclusion is saying so you're not weakening it by just providing another way that the conclusion could be true
When taking tests on LSAC, is the interface the same as the LSAT? Last time I used it only took up 75% of my screen with the left 25% taken up.
@droddddd387 i was on the same exact boat and i don't disagree with you. i think the key here though is remembering we aren't trying to destroy our argument, just introduce some "reasonable doubt" lol.
B definitely isn't strong enough to kill this argument. i think it's just the "best" of bad answer choices. the rest are wrong for clear reasons. yes, B requires you to fill some assumptions in, but there's really no better alternative.
example: the amount of fresh water available to meet needs varies significantly from region to region... so out of the small fraction of the supply, the US can have plenty and not sweat about an increasing population. Europe could have a tiny fraction of this and have an increasing population that their supply won't be able to support. that variation introduces some doubt in thinking that no water shortages will happen, because some may happen even if it isn't on a global scale
all around, this question is tough
the video explanation for this is poor tbh.
i think in understanding why D is wrong, "eventually" is the key word. it's out of scope from the stimulus which focuses on the "near future."
honestly i completely missed the "since" in B and fell for the trap. i was really confused because my B and D both fit, and obviously how could both be correct? i went for my gut and chose D, but i was honestly lucky.
reviewing now, the "since" is a lot more obvious; i will give the test writers props bc they almost got me on smth tricky and silly at the same time. lesson learned: watch out for your premise & conclusion indicators folks!!
an easy way for me to diagram/draw this out was drawing one circle for fiction and another for nonfiction and then drawing circles within those with the criteria in the stimulus.
because the question is asking us what can be properly inferred, we know not to go beyond the stimulus or accept new info from ACs. i treated it like a MBT. some ACs were flat out wrong while others were "eh... could be true," but i'd need more info before saying if it was true/false.
if you limit it by the stimulus, i think it becomes much easier to accept E because you're only given these conditions. maybe, in the real world, the publishing house/company publishes more than just fiction and non-fiction... but as far as we know from the stimulus (which is the only "world" we can get info from), we only have these two categories so it's easy to stay within it
in reading E:
"unrequested manuscripts"... okay so either the fiction literary agent ones or the nonfiction renowned figure ones (2 out of the 4 options)
"NOT submitted by literary agents"... okay now we've just got renowned figures left. and bam that's E
@bella_nova i feel like this the most natural read if you limit your scope to the passage. i know we have to make reasonable inferences/assumptions sometimes, but i didn't think of the "risk of pursuing a legal action" as encompassing more than the passage states because that simply isn't discussed. in the passage, the only risks we talk about/are concerned with are the financial ones like the burden of paying for your lawyer.
yes, there are probably more risks in the real world like you stated in your comment, but i think we have to separate those thoughts from the ones that we get directly/indirectly from the passage.
@joshmet The author says: "...while only a minority of unabraded Calvaria major seeds germinate, the number is still probably sufficient to keep this species from becoming extinct." That's a pretty good reason to believe that the tree isn't threatened by imminent extinction.
Do we know whether the author believes there could be other factors contributing to the tree's decline? Sure, but we don't know anything about whether these factors contribute to extinction because the author doesn't even dive into that point at all.
Could they be factors that would cause extinction?? Maybe??
But the point is the author doesn't give us any indication to believe that this question/possibility is on their mind. We're not looking at what's possible here; we are looking at what the author believes and their perspective.
@JacobBaska thank you!! ive seen your comments before and was hoping you'd comment haha. im waiting for my oct score right now and preparing my materials. hopefully won't need to retake but if i do im registered for nov. in the mean time, ive been working on essays like my PS, DS, and LSAT addendum (flopped my first bc of a health reason). really trying to get it all together but just nervous im going to be late or get disadvantaged by not being able to realistically apply earlier than end nov/early dec.