Discussions

noahslinker656

Joined: Apr 2025
Subscription: Free

PrepTests ·

PT102.S2.Q24

noahslinker656

Monday, Sep 20 2021

Not sure why, but I got hung up on the phrase "in this case" in the stimulus and chose AC D because of it.

Word to the wise, don't miss the forest for the trees.

PrepTests ·

PT106.S2.Q6

noahslinker656

Thursday, Aug 12 2021

I think the "unusually fast" part is actually critical to why it's the correct answer.

We know based on the photographs that the ship did not implode, and that ships only implode when they're fully flooded. The lawgic I mapped out was /FF --> implode, /implode --> FF.

The paragraph also tells us that when ships sink the way the Rienzi did, they normally aren't FF unless sabotage.

Since we know that the ship DID NOT implode, that only leaves two options... both involving fully flooded ships. Either the ship was sabotaged, or the ship took on water at a rate that wasn't normal, AKA unusually fast.

PrepTests ·

PT111.S4.Q14

noahslinker656

Wednesday, Jul 28 2021

Hey, I think the easiest way to explain it is that AC E switches the sufficient and necessary.

We're looking for something that connects 'having a good perspective of the world' and 'not taking success for granted', in that order. Because there's a gap in the argument there that is needed to make the argument valid. (We know that struggling early in life leads to having a good perspective, but we do not know that having a good perspective leads to not taking success for granted).

AC E introduces 'taking success for granted' as a sufficient condition for having a good perspective of the world, reversing the logic of the argument. (We're looking for A --> B, with A being the premise and B being the conclusion; this answer gives us B --> A). Remember, the we're not trying to make the conclusion support the premise - but rather the premise support the conclusion.

AC B keeps the argument logic in the correct order, by introducing 'keeping a good perspective' as the sufficient condition for 'not taking success for granted'.

I hope this helps. Sorry if I rambled a bit, let me know if I can clear anything else up.

General

•

Tuesday, Jun 29 2021

noahslinker656

August or October LSAT?

So I'm sure there are tons of previous discussion forum posts about this exact question, but I wanted to make my own so I could insert where I am personally.

I have a 160 score on file from February... I took the LSAT basically on a whim and studied for about a week or two (and that study was largely unproductive since I was taking non-timed individual sections without blind review, etc.).

I've now been using 7Sage for about a month and am progressing very well. It seems like I can make a significant improvement on my February score and open up more opportunities for myself. I think I'm trending towards the 165-170 mark and that feels like a completely different score than the 160 I have currently. However, I've always heard that applying as early as possible is a good thing for law school.

Could someone give me advice on whether or not waiting until early November is "too late" for the next cycle as far as scholarships, etc. are concerned? I understand that every cycle is different, but what's the norm?

I could probably stretch and make it through the Core Curriculum in time for the August LSAT date - but I'd definitely be rushing and wouldn't have the opportunity to really reflect on what I've learned, or to solidify those skills with multiple practice tests.

Any help will be appreciated. Thanks everyone.

PrepTests ·

PT106.S3.Q25

noahslinker656

Tuesday, Jun 29 2021

I mistook "subtype" in AC E for meaning something along the lines of "in the same family", requiring a much larger assumption to be made. I do see it now though

PrepTests ·

PT103.S3.Q24

noahslinker656

Tuesday, Jun 29 2021

Tricky. I fell for AC A. I had the right line of thinking for AC E, but just didn't give it enough of a chance because I had already settled on A being a good answer. Even in my notes I wrote down that AC A required a pretty big assumption!

PrepTests ·

PT102.S4.Q24

noahslinker656

Sunday, Jun 27 2021

Does the stimulus stating "all other things being equal" not eliminate the possibility of an alternative explanation? J.Y. completely skips over that part of the stimulus. #help

PrepTests ·

PT105.S2.Q4

noahslinker656

Saturday, Jun 26 2021

I still just can't see B as the correct answer choice... never are we told that THC/Marijuana has a carcinogenic effect, but rather inactivated herpesvirus cells are carcinogenic.

AC B does nothing to limit the idea that inactivated herpesvirus cells can convert healthy cells into cancer cells. Can anyone clarify this for me? It seems like a bad question/answer choice to me that I wouldn't recognize on test day.

#help

PrepTests ·

PT102.S4.Q3

noahslinker656

Thursday, Jun 24 2021

A to me seems like it might even strengthen the relationship between the premise and conclusion rather than weaken it, like we are asked to do.

If workers at nuclear plants are required to have additional training, etc., then that would offer a good explanation of why the numbers of incidents at this particular nuclear plant are lower than all other industrial plants. We don't know anything about other nuclear plants, so you can't assume either way.

Something I've noticed on weakening causation logic questions is the tendency for trap answer choices to explain a premise. For this example, let's say that AC A is notated as "X", and then the premise is "A" and the conclusion is "B."

We're asked to weaken the relationship between A and B. All X does is form it's own relationship with A. Like, X --> A --> B (Workers get extra training, therefore numbers of incidents are down, therefore this plant is safer by the standard of number of injuries occurring). Do you see how this doesn't really weaken the relationship?

PrepTests ·

PT103.S3.Q20

noahslinker656

Friday, Jun 11 2021

I get why B is the right answer (I originally choose A), but I completely disagree with the idea that A is the contrapositive of the line in the passage. Just because only poetry cannot be translated well does not mean that all other forms of literature can be... that's not valid at all because of the qualifier of "well". Some of the other forms of literature could just be translated "decently".

If it said instead "only poetry cannot be translated", then it would have a valid contrapositive in the form of "all other forms of literature can be translated".

Still, I think B is correct because purpose is never discussed at all and is therefore LEAST supported.

PrepTests ·

PT103.S1.Q12

noahslinker656

Friday, Jun 11 2021

Because answer choice C doesn't assume that the ants return to their nest, etc. It only states that they DON'T use the pheromones to guide between the food and the nests... which would have to be the case since the pheromones almost immediately vanish when met by conditions that are typical of the Sahara.

PrepTests ·

PT105.S2.Q23

noahslinker656

Friday, Jun 11 2021

Missed this one but knew I didn't feel good about my answer. I chose D, I'm guessing that if the answer choice said something like "Doctors can accurately predict SOME people who will develop chronic back pain in the future" then it would be a viable answer choice? Still, should've seen how E was easily supported.

PrepTests ·

PT106.S3.Q14

noahslinker656

Friday, Jun 04 2021

Really glad to hear J.Y. say that it would make more sense as an MSS question. I eliminated answer choice A because I felt that it had only been implied, not stated.