Hi! I'm looking for a study buddy to keep accountable with. I'm currently working on my undergrad in Chinese Language and hoping to take the LSAT in April. I'm on Eastern Standard Time.
My goal score is mid to high 170s. My current study plan is to do 2 preptests a week and wrong answer journal.
Whatsapp for communication is my preference, but I also have Discord. Anyone who is interested, please DM me!
It's possible to see improvements in your score without mastering logic. With the "cat → mammal" relationship this is expressed by the possibility that a creature could be a mammal without being a cat.
Remember that logic as described here is not about your knowledge of the world, but just the stated premises. You may think it's impossible to improve your score without mastering logic, but that's not what the argument is saying.
I think. I've now stared at this long enough that it has become gibberish, in the hopes that I not lead anyone astray...
Translate your contrapositive back to English.
Contrapositive: /PC → /BS
If pastries do not cook themselves, then birds cannot sing. This sentence is equivalent to “birds cannot sing unless pastries cook themselves.”
From my observation, they are possible answers to "what are the weakest points of the argument" type questions, meaning that the stimulus must expressly indicate that the sample size is small. This is importantly different from questions asking "what, if true, would most weaken the argument" questions, as those can bring up elements completely unnamed by the stimulus.
Take PT123 S02 Q21. We have no indication that the sample size is narrow, so B cannot be the correct answer.
I was trying to find a question for which the answer is too small a sample size, but I failed. Sorry :(
I hope that helps!