same.

😂 @618792

@618792 said:

@618792 said:

Not necessarily

My uncle went to an Ivy League school, and struggled immensely with the LSAT. It took him 3 years to get in.

In law school, he was at the top of his class. He was recruited by law firms in Boston & was very successful.

Some people are smart, they are not good test-takers. I’ll give myself as an example: my diagnostic was in the 130’s because I got so hung up on the hardest questions (I started with questions 25... don't ask). I kept reading and reading trying to make sense of the argument and spent all my time trying to get the hardest ones. Why? Because I like a challenge. I like to sit down and think. Think hard, think lots. Its my personality. I also get stressed when I am put under time constraints so there is a 15pt lag between my BR and PT score. But, I have no doubt I will do well in law school.

Also, the LSAT is poorly written. Bad grammar, plain, simple. It doesn’t get to the point. It is full of fluff. I have no trouble working with the income tax act (if you want to see a run-on sentence, go there) at work, but really struggled with some of the reading comp (think art, philosophy, history, peptides). Will my new knowledge on zeolites help me in law school? I really don’t see how. The LSAT is designed to be difficult.

I honestly do not think the LSAT is all its cut out to be. Maybe I’m just salty that I needed to put in a few months of studying. But, some of the schools are already abandoning it. Why is that?

I also believe that people who have to work hard for their grades are generally better prepared to work hard in law school. Those people are full of will, determination, and persistence: these are the ones that will be great lawyers, and thrive at work, and do great things because the will is there. The will triumphs all else; you would be surprised. My will has given me everything I have and enabled me to overcome many obstacles.

I truly believe the LSAT is just a money-making scheme, I wonder how many millions of assets LSAC is sitting on? I mean, think about it. It’s also there as a barrier to entry, and to weed out the ‘lazies’, give law school the “academically prestige” image. Also, some programs are much more difficult than others (think engineering vs economics or philosophy... sorry, engineering is much more difficult than either, at least for most).

I know everyone says otherwise, but I refuse to believe it. I have seen to many successful people perform poorly on the LSAT but thrive in law school.

Anyways, that is my two cents.

Yes, engineering is much more difficult than defending logic itself from people like Derrida and Foucault. Oh, and engineering is much more difficult than laying the groundwork for mathematics and computer science (and engineering). And engineering is much more difficult than formulating a priori deductions of the nature of necessity.

That is awesome! Congratulations!

#help 😖

This is great! Congratulations! What an amazing journey!

The fear will reduce only when you set precedent for yourself.

Unequivocally, your first few assimilated exams will be uncomfortable. Do not let that discourage you. Push through. Trust me. For each minute that you sit and continue taking the assimilated exam, you will few less uncomfortable. The second assimilation will still feel uncomfortable but significantly less than the initial. Likewise with the third, fourth... by then you should feel much more at ease.

YOU CAN DO THIS!

--

reduce fear → set precedent

do not set precedent → not reduce fear

answer choice (D) seems very convincing... I am still convinced.. #help

THANK YOU SAMI!

Thank you J.Y.!

@ebelineluna589 said:

I think of the LSAT community as a component of social life. :)

YES!

Subject: Offshore Oil Drilling

Opponent: The benefits of drilling new oil wells in certain areas are not worth the environmental risk. The new wells would only add half of 1% [of our country’s daily oil requirement] to the 4% of oil already being extracted from these areas

Proponent: Don’t be ridiculous! You might as well argue that new farms should not be allowed, since no new farm could supply the total food needs of our country

(A) ruins the parallel

(B) what does this have to do with anything?

(C) again, what does this have to do with anything?

(D) so what?

(E) again, so what?

Subject: Offshore Oil Drilling

Opponent: The benefits of drilling new oil wells in certain areas are not worth the environmental risk. The new wells would only add half of 1% [of our country’s daily oil requirement] to the 4% of oil already being extracted from these areas

Proponent: Don’t be ridiculous! You might as well argue that new farms should not be allowed, since no new farm could supply the total food needs of our country

(A) no evidence

(B) never stated

(C) does not point out!

(D) yes, 'new farms' is cited as parallel

(E) not at all!

Even though step length is shorter on a hard surface, the time the runner’s foot remains in contact with the running surface is less with a hard surface [than with a soft surface]. (fill in the blank). Therefore, a running track with a hard surface makes for greater running speed than a soft one

(at least under dry conditions).

Answer Choice Predication: a statement that could fulfill the partial explanation; fill in the blank to check if the reasoning is consistent.

---

(A) Although you take shorter steps on hard surfaces, your foot hardly remains on the ground. 'Dry running conditions can be guaranteed for indoor track races only'. That's why a hard surface track makes for greater speed than a soft one.

(B) Although you take shorter steps on hard surfaces, your foot hardly remains on the ground. 'In general, taller runners have greater average step length than shorter runners do'. That's why a hard surface track makes for greater speed than a soft one.

(C) Although you take shorter steps on hard surfaces, your foot hardly remains on the ground. 'Hard tracks enhance a runner’s speed by making it easier for the runner to maintain a posture that minimizes wind resistance'. That's why a hard surface track makes for greater speed than a soft one.

(D) Although you take shorter steps on hard surfaces, your foot hardly remains on the ground. 'The tracks at which the world’s fastest running times have been recorded are located well above sea level, where the air is relatively thin'. That's why a hard surface track makes for greater speed than a soft one.

(E) Although you take shorter steps on hard surfaces, your foot hardly remains on the ground. 'To remain in top condition, a soft track surface requires different maintenance procedures than does a hard one'. That's why a hard surface track makes for greater speed than a soft one.

University Chancellor: "Our university offers a wide range of subjects for our student body to take courses in. Hey you, Miriam! You're a student at this university, so you must take courses in a wide range of subjects, right?"

Miriam: "I guess I could... but I actually do not."

---

(A) School Principal: "The students at this school take math. Like, Miguel. He is a student at this school, so he takes math."

Miguel: "Yes I do take math. You could say that it's a requirement, we all have to take math if we go to this school."

(B) Law Journal Editor-in-Chief: "The editorial board of this law journal has written on many legal issues. This is Louise. She is on the editorial board, so she has written on many legal issues."

Louise: "No, I only wrote on one legal issue. Stop trying to integrate me into everything with the rest of the board!"

(C) Construction Worker: "The component parts of bulldozers are heavy. This machine right here, is a bulldozer, so it is heavy."

Construction Worker's Friend: "That makes sense."

(D) Mechanic: "All older automobiles need frequent oil changes. This car is new, so its oil need not be changed as frequently."

OA → FOC

OA → FOC

Patron: "No. I need my oil changed. By the way, you made an invalid argument. I can give you a list of reasons why I need frequent oil changes."

(E) Aspiring Neurologist: "The individual cells of the brain are incapable of thinking. Therefore, the brain as a whole is incapable of thinking.

Neurologist: "That is entirely incorrect."

Text Message Conversation* Between a Parent and her Friend:

Parent: You won't believe this, OMG! So I've been trying to get my daughter to brush her teeth but nothing has worked. I was hoping that she would at least try to imitate me brush my teeth! or that giving her reasons to brush her teeth would be enough to get her to do it! But no, nothing worked.

Friend: Oh no.

Parent: Now get this! I finally made it clear to her. I said that before her naps and at night, when I am just about to read her a story, I will brush her teeth for her. LOL! So a couple weeks later, whenever I would pick up a storybook (before her naps and at night), she would automatically grab her toothbrush and would start brushing her teeth herself!

Friend: No way! That's great!

Parent: I know! I wonder why she finally did it? Generally speaking, I mean. Do you think it's because children are most effectively taught to do something by someone’s setting an example?

Friend: No that can't be it. You said yourself that you hoped she would try to imitate you or at least be persuaded! I'm making a probable assumption that she didn't.

Parent: Haha, well would you say that children are just too young to understand rational arguments for adopting a behavior?

Friend: Doubt it.

Parent: Okay.. but I read in "The Generalized Times" that children often imitate the behavior of others rather than listening to reason.

Friend: Like I said before, she didn't imitate you! LOL.

Parent: What about how children ordinarily act contrary to their parents’ expectations in order to get more attention?

Friend: I don't think so.. honestly, if you want me to put it in generalized terms, I would say that children more readily adopt a behavior through habit and repetition than through other means.

Parent: Yeah! That generalization most closely conforms to my experience. Thanks!

---

*a frivolous, nevertheless parallel, brief synopsis of the lsat stimulus expressed in a text-message conversation between a parent and her friend.

Chefs’ Union: requested a 10% increase for each member.

Hotel Managers’ Union: requested an 8% increase for each member.

Conclusion: The average dollar amount of the raises that the Chefs’ Union has requested is greater than that of the raises requested by the Hotel Managers’ Union.

(A) Let's challenge this. Let's say the Chefs’ Union has 100 members and each member earns a salary of $9,600. The Hotel Managers’ Union has 30 members and each earn a salary of $38,400.

10% salary increase of $9,600 = $960

8% salary increase of $38,400 = $3,072

This contradicts the conclusion.

(B) The argument's conclusion focuses on the greater average dollar amount between the two unions, not the likelihood of which union could obtain the salary

increase they request.

(C) This provides consistent support. The conclusion is concerned with the average dollar amount. If the current salaries of the Chefs’ Union are, on average, higher than the Hotel Managers’ Union then the author's conclusion may follow.

(D) What is true of last year reveals no truth about this year.

(E) This would not strengthen the argument. It does not provide any support that the average dollar amount of the raises that the Chefs’ Union has requested is greater than that of the raises requested by the Hotel Managers’ Union. Similar to answer choice (D).

LOL!

Subject: Peat Harvesting in this Country

Opponents: Peat Harvesting would change our peat-rich wetlands and our country’s water supply could be contaminated.

Author: BUT this cannot be true. Why? Well... in Ireland, peat has been harvested for centuries and their water supply is not contaminated.

Conclusion: We can safely proceed with the harvesting of peat.

-----

Opponents: cause, effect

Cause: peat harvesting Effect: alter the ecological balance of peat-rich wetlands

Further Effect/Direct Consequence: country’s water supply threatened with contamination.

Author: cause, without effect

Cause: peat harvesting in Ireland Effect: Ireland's water supply not contaminated.

-----

Reasonable Doubter (Me): Hey, author? How are you so sure that we can safely proceed with the harvesting of peat? How are you so sure that my country's water supply won't be contaminated? Just because you mentioned peat being harvested in Ireland and their water supply not having been contaminated?! That's not enough! I want answers!

(A) That could be true, but there still leaves room for me to believe that my country’s water supply could be threatened with contamination!

(B) Interesting. So what you're saying is... since the water supply is not contaminated in Ireland (after peat having been harvested) and since the peat-harvesting areas of Ireland were virtually identical to the undisturbed wetlands of my country, then my country's water supply would not be threatened with contamination! This helps me understand your conclusion much more, thanks for strengthening it!

(C) This does not address my doubts about the conclusion you reached in your argument, author!

(D) Oh, I did not know that.. nevertheless, my country's peat resources could just as well be larger than those of countries that successfully harvest peat. I still have reasonable belief that our water could be threatened with contamination!

(E) I can believe that, but what about my country? You haven't addressed my suspicion!

Hey! I could not find any exam dates for South Korea after the June 2019! I think there has not been an update on the international exam dates list on their website, it would be best to call LSAC and ask them :smiley: I would have called them myself right now but their offices are closed

+1 (215) 968-1001

Monday through Friday between 8:30 a.m. and 4:45 p.m. (Eastern Standard Time)

I know exactly how you feel, I felt extremely anxious about taking my first assimilated PT and I continued to put it off :confused: but trust me when I say this: just go ahead and rip that metaphorical bandage right off. It is the best way to overcome the feeling of anxiety. You will see that taking the full PT it is not as bad as your anxiety makes it seem, you may even look back at yourself and laugh! :wink:

Hey @thecmancan! I agree, this does seem like an over-generalization! I am glad you caught that! In the LSAT, I noticed that there are multiple errors hidden within incorrect answer choices, like this!

Answer choice (A) states:

"takes the views of one lawyer to represent the views of all lawyers"

Here is an issue with that answer choice! The conclusion states:

"even some legal professionals are losing their ability to distinguish fiction from reality"

Quantifier trick! The author does not generalize all lawyers, rather, the author makes a faulty generalization about some lawyers!

*computer programs X: provides solutions to mathematical problems in engineering

Premise 1: more computer programs X are being produced

Premise 2: it is not necessary for engineers to understand math principles.

Conclusion: in training engineers, focus less on math principles...focus on other subjects.

(assumption: computers will do the work, engineers do not need to know math principles, etc.)

(A) To use computer programs X effectively, need to understand math principles

Yes. This attacks an assumption being made! This weakens our argument because it challenges the premise that it is "unnecessary for practicing engineers to have a thorough understanding of fundamental mathematical principles".

(B) Many of computer programs X are already in use

What is the significance of this? Whether the programs are in use or not, this does not weaken our argument as our conclusion suggests a change to the current curriculum..practices..

(C) Must allow time for new material to be taught

This strengthens are argument, if anything! The argument concludes that we should spend more time on other important subjects.

(D) Most of computer programs X can be run on computers available to most engineering firms

Again, (if anything) this answer choice strengthens our argument. This suggests 'hey, all the more reason to pursue!'

(E) The curriculum requires engineering students to be familiar/use variety of computer programs

Why would this matter? The conclusion states that there should be a shift in emphasis. Even if the curriculum requires engineering students be familiar with/able to use a variety of computer programs, then (pursuant to the conclusion) this could be less emphasized without challenging the argument

Enjoy your well-deserved break! You will return feeling refreshed and recharged! :smile: