Discussions

yudongnathanliu815

Joined: Apr 2025
Subscription: Free

PT144.S2.Q18

yudongnathanliu815

Friday, Nov 06 2020

I think B is ultimately a better answer than D but I got a beef with it. The AC states "less likely to be remembered by medical staff".

Huh? There's no reference to medical staff in the first argument about changes in medical status; it's an element of the full moon argument.

I feel like there's a conflation of 'patients remebering medical changes' and 'medical staff remembering medical changes' as elements here.

But I suppose you could argue that it's not a crazy assumption to make that medical staff are likely to be the ones to be reporting patients' predictions of changes in medical status? (what a convoluted sentence) I dunno....

PrepTests ·

PT144.S2.Q15

yudongnathanliu815

Thursday, Nov 05 2020

Yeah, honestly upon review I feel like A and B are equally bad. I'm sure JY could make an equally convincing video showing up that conflating 'journalism's purpose' with the rationale of media and news publishers is a bad assumption.

PrepTests ·

PT106.S3.Q12

yudongnathanliu815

Thursday, Oct 22 2020

#help

Hey if you got this question wrong, don't sweat it. You know why? Because the question itself is what's wrong!

Let me explain:

The stimulus does not state that Roach Ender was tested against every roach species that infests North America but that vexone has been utilized effectively against them. For E to be a MBF, we must assume the effective utilization of vexone to be equivalent to the testing of Roach Ender? How can we do this? Roach Ender does not equal vexone and making that assumption does not comport with any sort of logical relationship in the stimulus. Again, why assume Roach Ender is the same thing as vexone? If they wanted us to make this assumption then LSAC should have only mentioned vexone, and not introduced this 'Roach Ender'. How in holy hell do we know how many species Roach Ender was tested against? 1? 600? 4 trillion? There's nothing in this stimulus to indicate. Bad, bad question that LSAC should be ashamed of. The whole argument JY presents against E is valid only if we make this faulty assumption. Otherwise it's a red herring.

Unless anyone has any arguments that prove E must be false, this question should be eliminated.

PrepTests ·

PT131.S2.Q22

yudongnathanliu815

Wednesday, Oct 21 2020

I'd say yes in most cases. If an answer on a strengthening question negated clearly weakens the argument, it's likely the answer. Of course, you have to watch out for cases where multiple answers seem to 'pass' this test, and think about which one weakens the argument most.

PrepTests ·

PT131.S4.P3.Q16

yudongnathanliu815

Wednesday, Oct 21 2020

16 is total crap, barfworthy question that someone should be fired for. Yeah LSAC, knowing what 'oxidization' means is really the point of the LSAT? Fug off....

And I'm saying this even though I got it right...

PrepTests ·

PT129.S1.Q19

yudongnathanliu815

Thursday, Oct 08 2020

A makes me think that the the human language ability is actually a curse. I've never wanted to murder a sentence more.

PrepTests ·

PT103.S1.Q26

yudongnathanliu815

Wednesday, Oct 07 2020

A quibble I have with this problem is that it conflates 'handwriting analysts who make exaggerated claims' with the handwriting analysts who will be called as witnesses. If D does indeed make it so that the former group will never be able to pass the board and therefore be called as witnesses, could there not be some analysts who do NOT claim handwriting provides reliable evidence of character who are still called as witnesses anyway? I know it seems unlikely that someone would be called as an expert witness who doubts the usefulness of his or her own expertise, but I don't think it's unreasonable in the scope of the logic of the stimulus.

BUT, even with that in mind D is still the best answer.

PrepTests ·

PT111.S3.Q24

yudongnathanliu815

Tuesday, Oct 06 2020

I think that the question makes the assumption that the studios do not consider why the video stores purchase the cassettes, so the stores end up paying royalties for every replacement copy they get from the studios the same as thy would pay for any non-replacement copy.

Admissions · How much does admissions consulting help?

yudongnathanliu815

Thursday, Sep 24 2020

If you're really just aiming for one specific place I don't know if you really need the package(though hourly/a la carte editing might be worth it). But first priority, I would say, get your PTs up and focus on October. The LSAT median is only 162! If you can hit the mid 160's you'll be well above both medians and probably a shoo in.

General

•

Wednesday, Sep 23 2020

yudongnathanliu815

Strategies for studying (3rd LSAT take, All PTs after 70 exhausted)

Hey yall!

I had closed my account after the August Flex. But I'm a splitter and I think I can achieve an even better LSAT score for the November test if my PTs were any indication, so now Im back babyyyyyyy!

But anyway, I'm wondering if anyone is in a similar situation as far as having gone through almost all the recent PT's. Not only that, but I've found that I've only got about 10 clean and fresh PTs out of ALL of them. Now those 10 PTs will be enough for the five weeks or so that I have left to study, but they're very old. Has anyone found it helpful to retake already completed PTs? Or have general tips or strategies they use when they've already gone through all of the core curriculum/most of the questions?

Thanks!

PrepTests ·

PT134.S4.P3.Q17

yudongnathanliu815

Friday, Aug 28 2020

The issue is that D is way too strong in its assertion that 'no possible evidence could confirm or disconfirm them' This is not the logical equivalent to what the author of B seems to be saying to A which to me is 'Hey A. Just because you found a possible explanation for your claim doesn't mean you can infer it is THE explanation. What about other equally valid explanations?'. one shouldn't jump the gun. He's not saying there's no way to know whether the claims are right, just that He's definitely not saying 'who cares about your claims? We'll never know whether they're right or wrong' as the attitude of AC D seems to betray.

PrepTests ·

PT154.S2.Q24

yudongnathanliu815

Tuesday, Aug 25 2020

I was not attracted to D at all because I think I was too married to the idea that the figure in the battle painting was indeed the figure in the self portrait, and that all that there was to contend is whether the person who painted the self portrait is the person who painted the battle. For this reason, none of the answers really appealed to me.

Ultimately I picked A because it seemed to at least suggest the possibility to me that 'Maybe a painter colleague of his painted him into the battle, and it's just a coincidence that he also painted a self portrait in the same year.' I see now that I was grasping at straws like crazy there, because I simply could not accept that the figure in the painting and the figure in the self-portrait could be different people. This probably serves as an example to be as literal as possible when interpreting the stimulus. 'A Closely resembles B ' means just that here. It would be ridiculous in the real world to say that because I resemble someone from a 1860's photograph, I must be the same person. I committed a similar mistake here, taking it to mean 'A is in fact B' is the sort of assumption you don't even notice yourself make that can end up costing you time(I spent 5 whole minutes on this Q) and a right answer.

PrepTests ·

PT140.S4.P4.Q25

yudongnathanliu815

Saturday, Aug 22 2020

#help

Not a fan of Q25.

While the last paragraph does explain a motivation for science/scientists to be attracted to the second explanation, the physicists described in the first paragraph are attracted to a theory that emphatically is NOT based on a 'tendency to separate the phenomenon from the observer of the phenomenon'. What, are we supposed to presume that these physicists are the few and the brave in their community and that physicists are typified by acceptance of the FTB explanation? If they reject the explanation that relies on the supposed tendency, how can we then presume that physicists generally possess this tendency? If AC C had instead stated 'the traditional tendency of some physicists, it would be infinitely better as an answer.

Now I chose E and I totally see how it's just this garbled mish-mash and isn't really better, but as it stands C seems pretty unsupportable unless one makes some MAJOR assumptions.

PrepTests ·

PT142.S3.P1.Q1

yudongnathanliu815

Wednesday, Aug 19 2020

This has got to be one of the hardest RC sections ever listed, both in terms of amount of difficult questions and the sense of time pressure. Starting off an RC section with a MP question as difficult as this is sheer brutality.

PrepTests ·

PT138.S2.Q24

yudongnathanliu815

Monday, Aug 03 2020

A could be correct, but E is more relevant given the information that we are given. The flaw that is apparent is the correlation/causation confusion regarding hormones and stress. Nothing in the text directly supports or opposes A-it is not the most relevant flaw for our purposes.

PrepTests ·

PT138.S1.P1.Q6

yudongnathanliu815

Monday, Aug 03 2020

For Q6, AC C seems like a really weak correct answer, mostly because of issues with syntax. When I read 'The first and third lines are a set convention' in the final paragraph, I assumed this referred to variants of the Gregorio Cortez corrido. This is an assumption yes, but I don't see why it's more reasonable to assume, given the placement of this information, that it refers to complete corridos in general, which is what JY states in the video as support for AC C. If the sentence had read 'The first and third lines are a set convention for all complete corridos', that would make more sense. #help

PrepTests ·

PT118.S1.Q16

yudongnathanliu815

Saturday, Jul 11 2020

I think that what makes C the right answer is that it is describing a world in which successful authors can complete manuscripts who are far from death. The general trap of the stimulus that I fell for is that it makes us think only of authors who are facing their death and have to make a decision about whether to keep or destroy their manuscripts.

I interpreted C as 'Someone could, after the author dies, judge the manuscript to be very valuable' and thought to myself 'who cares what others think? This is about the author's own evaluation of her work' But if you interpret C as possibly including 'the author initially judges a finished manuscript as worthless but later changes their mind and wants it to be published and to be associated with it', then that argues against the idea that they should immediately destroy such a manuscript upon completion.

PrepTests ·

PT155.S4.Q23

yudongnathanliu815

Monday, Jul 06 2020

Yeah if they had written 'curries eaten by Indians who live in Singapore' instead of 'Indian curries' E would have been a better AC. As it is, this is one of those questions where the right AC is the best out of a shitty lot.

PrepTests ·

PT155.S4.Q23

yudongnathanliu815

Monday, Jul 06 2020

If they had written 'curries eaten by Indians who live in Singapore' instead of 'Indian curries' E would have been a better AC. As it is, this is one of those questions where the right AC is the best out of a shitty lot.

PrepTests ·

PT102.S4.Q17

yudongnathanliu815

Friday, Jul 03 2020

I think the fact that it is part of the conclusion(which is 'Can we afford not to') is what makes it a flaw. If it had just been used rhetorically in the argument that's one thing, but stated as a conclusion it essentially fails to counter the mayor's argument because it essentially sidesteps the crux of the argument by changing the meaning of the word. There's no answer to the financial inability to pay for the proposed restoration.

I didn't choose A but was tempted, and I don't think it's 100 percent clear why it's not a flaw(besides maybe thinking that respect for government/institutions is a part of the appeal that isn't emotional) but even if it is a flaw, it is less important because it messes with the premise rather than C which invalidates the conclusion.

PrepTests ·

PT107.S1.Q15

yudongnathanliu815

Tuesday, Jun 30 2020

I think his explanations are designed for those who find the more purely mechanical explanations boring or at least hard to sit through hours of studying. I definitely don't find clarity to be an issue for the vast majority of the content, but I could see how if someone is more used to formal instruction or not knowing a lot of pop culture(especially Star Wars lol) would.

PrepTests ·

PT103.S4.P3.Q16

yudongnathanliu815

Tuesday, Jun 30 2020

I also chose D but after watching JY's explanation several times, I think I get what the problem is. The author indeed accepts all the data that had been put forth by the research team-she finds faults with the fact they omitted other relevant data(the die-offs beginning before the bloom) and how it was interpreted but never questions anything they found. What the author has beef with is the conclusion. So as in A, the teacher rejects the conclusion

D is exactly wrong for the reason JY said. On a quick read-over, it basically just states that doctor A misdiagnoses a problem(i.e. comes to the wrong conclusion regarding the main cause of the die off), and then the other doctor(author) prescribes medication. That's too vague. That could mean the author suggests a course of action based off the faulty conclusion(as JY read it) OR it could mean the author suggesta a course of action based off a new correct diagnosis(as you seemed to read it). But without further information, there's no reason to favor one over the other. That's the gap that D leaves us with.

I do have a nitpick with A in that it introduces the student-teacher relationship into the equation. That doesn't seem relevant at all to the passage, the author certainly seems to be in a more doctor to doctor relationship than a teacher to student relationship with the research team. But I think it's more minor than the problem with D.

PrepTests ·

PT104.S2.P4.Q26

yudongnathanliu815

Sunday, Jun 21 2020

Yeah, I think that 26 is one of those questions where the correct AC is the best out of a bad lot. As questionable as the assumption is, there are some considerations why E is the best one.

1) E takes a position too far but it at least comes from taking an attitude, namely skepticism about the accuracy of archaeological reconstructions, that the author stated in the text too far, not some random assertion like C that is just out of left field, or taken in the opposite direction of the author's view, like A.

2)This is, as another commenter has stated, more of an MSS than a MBT question, so E can be a questionable answer and still be the best one

PrepTests ·

PT149.S2.P4.Q27

yudongnathanliu815

Tuesday, Jun 16 2020

Hmm for question 27, I don't see the phrasing of AC E as implying that continued social progress is inevitable. I read it as implying that IF such progress occurs, then cooperation and nurturance will be inevitably an aspect of that progress, that there can be no world where such social progress occurs without those elements.

In the last sentence of the last paragraph, it seems that 'restoration of a balance...includes...cooperation and nurturance' are held to be a necessary condition for future social progress. Therefore, E is simply stating that the presence of future social progress must include more cooperation and nurturance. #help

PrepTests ·

PT143.S2.P2.Q11

yudongnathanliu815

Wednesday, Jun 10 2020

#help

For question 11, I think there is textual support for choosing answer B. In the third paragraph, the author states after claiming that transparency requirement should be implemented "Accordingly, we should eliminate disqualification motions alleging bias, whether actual or apparent'. Is this not the author's way of saying that the transparency requirement is incompatible with the statutes that allow for such motions?