So I'm based in Melbourne, Australia and my first preference is Melbourne University and my second is Monash University. I have already been accepted into Monash (my alma mater), and today I was notified that my application from Melbourne was rejected because my score was too low. My LSAT score is 156 and they have indicated they'd be looking for 160+ for a successful application. I'm 24 and I'm kind torn on whether I should try the LSAT again and wait till the next round this time next year, or accept Monash and start in January. If I wait I would be graduating at 29 or possibly older and feel that might be too old, but Melbourne is 8th in the world and the LSAT standards in Australia are so much lower than the rest of the world, I feel like its an opportunity I shouldn't squander. The next LSAT exam is in January here but there will also be one in March, and probably June as well as September, so I'm also not sure if I do opt to take it again if I want to draw it out for more study time, or do it sooner so as to not forget stuff or burn out.

Opinions would be greatly appreciated.

So I have a question regarding the rule used for negation ie 'All jedi use the force' is negated as 'some jedi do not use the force'.

Wouldn't 'some jedi do use the force' have the same effect, because both are inferring that if some do or don't, then the opposite must also be true and some don't or do?

Another example 'Every doctor in this hospital is qualified to work on combating the city's zombie epidemic.', isn't 'some doctors in this hospital are not qualified to work on combating the city's zombie epidemic' conveying the same information as 'some doctors in this hospital are qualified to work on combating the city's zombie epidemic' would? that if some are qualified, than others aren't. That if some aren't qualified, others are? What is the significance of the negative?