What would this fallacy look like: Mistakenly equating what is actual for what is merely possible?

Hi,

I'm in the process of writing the Berkeley Law Opportunity Scholarship essay (anyone also applying for BLOS??) and was wondering if anyone would be down to read my draft? I would really appreciate any feedback. And if anyone wants to have a second pair of eyes read/edit their BLOS essay, feel free to DM me as well!

the prompt for this essay is - How do you think being a first generation college student has shaped your perspective, and how will that perspective contribute to the Berkeley Law community?

Thank you!

I've FP'ed all the games up to this point, and I didn't do TOO badly on this game, but it definitely tested me pretty hard. The other three games were extremely standard so they weren't a problem. Are these games (like Game 3) worth focusing on, or are they so unique it will be difficult to carry anything substantial forward from them? I know JY said there were several games in PT 1-35 that are no longer very applicable, and I'm wondering if that goes for any of the games in 35 and up.

i.e., what to look for/why they seem to be a little more tricky compared to earlier ones/ways to approach. seem to get stuck on these. thanks!

The school requires 2 LORs.

The total number of required documents is 2.

The school will only accept up to 3 LORs.

The total number accepted cannot exceed 3.

Accepts letters of recommendation when the initial law school report is ready to be sent and when LSAC has received at least 2 letters of recommendation.

The law school report will be updated and sent each time LSAC receives a letter of recommendation.

Does this mean that if I'm waiting on one more professor for a letter (I've assigned two letters {which is the number required for this specific app} to this application. Only one of them is received. But waiting on another), and I submit my application now without having my professor having uploaded my letter -- the professor can upload it later and the law school report will update it?

Basically what I am asking lol is if I can go forth and pay the application fee and submit my application, even without one of the letters assigned being received yet?

Based on the LR problems I'm getting wrong (Weakening/Strengthening, Necessary Assumption, MSS, etc.) I think I'm having difficulty understanding support. Or at least understanding it concretely. For example with weaken questions, I know that I can't weaken the premises or the conclusion, and I know the "right" questions to ask (Even given these premises, the conclusion still doesn't necessarily follow because...) but unless the weaken question has causal or conditional reasoning it it, I'm not really sure how to approach it (aside from just kind of feeling it out). I have absolutely no problem finding the premises and conclusion and understanding which is which, or mapping out arguments. But the idea of support still feels kind of nebulous to me. If you have any ideas on how to make support more concrete, or suggestions on what made the concept click for you I'd really appreciate it!

Hi! Specific question about the Stanford optional essays. I've chosen to do the song one and want to just write the titles of the songs, accompanied by Youtube links, and let them stand on their own. However, the wording of the prompt is making me think that there is a 100 word minimum????? (i.e. "Note that there is a 100 to 250-word limit for each question."). Anyone have any insight on this? Thanks!

So contrary to popular opinions regarding not taking full PTs right before the exam, I couldn't help myself bc I had bought PT 85 just a few days ago and wanted to take it before I sit for the exam (2nd take) on Saturday. I'm not sure if it was the nerves, the exam itself, or maybe even the fact that I may seem to getting burnt out but I ended up scoring 10 points lower than I usually do for pts (Usually hitting ~165). The 1st section (RC) was super difficult for me as well as the 2nd section (LR) and I ended up falling for many of the trap answers.

Feeling super discouraged and slightly freaking out about this exam and wanted to see if anyone had similar experiences with PT 85? I plan on just BR through this exam all of tomorrow and then taking Friday off before the exam to just watch netflix haha. Trying to tell myself that this Nov exam isn't the end all be all - there's still Jan or even March if need be.

Also, what games do you guys recommend to do right before the actual exam on Sat? One I can take with me to the testing location to do before the exam starts that will get my juices flowing.

Hey guys I know it is a little too late to improve now since the test is in two days ( There is always January), I am having a very hard time timing myself doing logic games. I have gone through the curriculm and done the foundational games 7-10 times. However, I still trip up when I see a game that has a sentence that throws me off and looks like a game i have never done before.

Are there situations where the foolproof method is not applicable because they came up with a new game and you will just have to "figure it out" ?

.

There seems to be this consensus: applying on late January/early February equals lower chances to get in.

The rolling basis process is real, many schools start accepting people as soon as the application window opens, therefore affecting the seats available. Yet many applicants don't hear back until early spring, actually some numbers even suggest that most applicants send their applications starting January.

https://blog.spiveyconsulting.com/its-early-youre-early-this-whole-damn-place-is-early/

Is it safe to compare the timing with the admission rate? Couldn't this be simply a causation/correlation flaw, just because lots of people get in by applying early on, it could be due to the fact that the most qualified applicants apply early in the cycle and as a consequence are more likely to get in.

I heard a dean of admission -from a competitive school- say that if you don't get in there is a reason why, and timing really doesn't matter.

Are there any supplemental sources you suggest? I've been looking at getting either the LSAT Trainer or the Manhattan LR but was not sure which one would be best fit. My weak areas are Flaw Method of Reasoning Questions, MSS, and NA/ Pseudo NA questions. I've went back to the CCs but still feel like I'm not completely grasping these question types. I would appreciate any advice! Thanks!

Remember! They've changed their policy since September about identification. It now has to match exactly with what you inputted for LSAC.

My name is not standard, and although I always write my name as one word, government offices always separate my name into two parts. So I had to update my profile to match my ID exactly last week. Make sure you guys do the same!

They say it takes 3-5 days for them to get back to you, but in my case, they updated my name in minutes after I sent the email, so I think they're trying their hardest to accommodate people who have to make changes in response to the change in policy.

Just a PSA~ Talk to you all after Saturday. =)

My gpa is 3.66 and I am aiming for the T14, so I have decided to delay a cycle to test in June! I am asking for strategies to go from 161 to 170+. The highest BR I have had so far is 170. How exactly should I study and improve? What tips do you have?

Taking suggestions on the following dilemma:

I started studying in late June - I worked through 1 lesson per day of the LSAT trainer, did the prescribed drills, and completed that in about 2 months. From there I have done mostly timed sections (all of 72-81) and 62-68; however, I have only taken approximately 5 or 6 full length exams. I started at a 143 cold diagnostic and my scores are 156, 154, 158, 161, and 154. I got logic games down to avg -4 (some later PTs killed this average with the miscellaneous games). I feel confident there now. I do not feel confident in LR although I feel much more prepared than I did 1 month ago.

Here's the dilemma - I am taking the test Saturday. My goal when this all started was to get a 162. I really would like to start law school next fall and not wait a whole year; however, I absolutely know I am capable of a significantly higher score than what I will get on Saturday.I really think I can get 170+ if I did the 40 plus tests took all the time, but is it worth waiting another year? I am 25, turn 26 in March, and a life underwriter (risk selection for a big company) so work is very draining - lots of reading and critical thinking throughout the day. So, studying has felt rushed and stressful. Money is also a big factor in this equation due to lots of undergrad debt from a private institution.

If I take the nov test and continue to study for the January, do you all think that 10ish weeks would be sufficient to get to the 165 mark? Obviously I am nowhere close to the prescribed 40 PTs though. So say I'd do 1 PT per weekend for 10 weeks and some sort of light drill work during the week on LR. Do you think that would give me a good shot at 165?

This is incredibly scattered and non linear - forgive me for that. I'm in full stress/evaluation mode.

Thanks for feedback.

-P

Completely lost on this question. Any explanations would be much appreciated.

Admin note: edited title

I'm having a hard time understanding this question at all. I've found very little help online for this question. Can anyone please explain.

"If the standards committee has a quorum...."

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-83-section-1-question-18/

Hey everyone,

I was wondering if any of my fellow 7sagers could offer some insight into this topic. I am planning on writing the Jan LSAT. LG is my weakest section, similar to most others on the LSAT journey. I really like JY's methods of teaching LG and I am beginning to get the hang of it but I feel really overwhelmed. I want to try the foolproof method of doing the games but I'm just wondering how I'm supposed to do one game so many times when there is a lot of other stuff to focus on. Between PTs, BR, drilling, watching explanations, and trying to stay sane, how did you guys adopt the foolproof method? There are just so many games and it would obviously be impossible to foolproof all of them in the mere 70some days that are remaining till the Jan LSAT, but how can I even get close? If you keep going back in a day or two to redo a previous game, I feel like you would barely get through any new content? I usually manage to make 20-25 hours to study each week and I've thought about just using the random bits of spare time in my day to foolproof a few games for fun every day. But still, I just don't see a way to move forward with studying while continuously redoing old games over and over. And the truth of the matter is that I could certainly use the foolproofing on every game I come across because I'm definitely slow in this section. I'm not aiming for a perfect score but I want to be as prepared as possible in order to reduce my anxiety surrounding LG.

Looking forward to hearing your ideas, suggestions, and thoughts. Please #help!

I was wanting to apply for Fall 2019, but I'm not sure what my chances will be at the T14. I did look at the predictor and was quite discouraged. I am hoping to score better on the LSAT on Saturday, but highly considering cancelling it. It's strange because I do get 170 as my BR score, but I am struggling to make it my real score. Any suggestions? Should I just try it and see what I get on this exam, or should I just wait another cycle? I am pretty set on Top 14 though, preferably Michigan or Northwestern.

Hello!

This NA question is causing my blood pressure to rise.

I have trouble accepting E).

Negating E) doesn't destroy the argument. It's okay if medicine DOES reduce stress, as long as it isn't ONLY reducing stress. Maybe it reduces stress and inhibits hormone production.

I bring this up because in the second premise, it says that "any illness caused by stress--> treatable ONLY by the reduction of stress".

To bridge the gap between this premise and the conclusion, we need a NA that states "Medicine does not treat high blood pressure ONLY by reduction of stress", NOT "Medicine used to treat HBP does not reduce stress", which is what E) is saying.

I feel like if the premise had said, "any illness caused by stress--> treatable by the reduction of stress", AC E) would be absolutely the necessary assumption of the argument.

Please help. I'm so stuck :'( :'(

Thank you!!

Admin note: added link

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-48-section-1-question-20/

Reposting from my comment

This question has one of the most insane assumptions I’ve ever seen on the LSAT, I’m sorry but this should of been taken off the exam. The assumption that a twin watching another twin would fall more (or completely) under the watching self category and than the watching other category would be like assuming both twins looking in mirror would have difficulty telling which one they are.

D) In the studies of Identical twins, participants who observed their twin reading overreported by a significant amount how much time they themselves spent reading in the days that followed.

This cannot weaken part of the argument without strengthening the other part. Is a twin watching a twin more like watching an other or watching oneself? you know the answer. So you plug this in, it would actually strengthen the argument.

You basically have to assume that group this answer effects for sure (the watching other group) is somehow effected less than the group that you have to make a massive assumption for, so that the argument can be weakened.

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-81-section-2-question-22/

Hi! Just wondering if I'm missing something. Why are some of the video explanations missing from PT 85?

Since the Mastermind watch is banned, I need a watch very quickly in time for the exam on Saturday. I had purchased one from Kohl's but it is too loud. Does anyone know where to get a silent watch??

I'm taking the November 17th LSAT and took my second to last PT yesterday (PT 84). I felt incredibly discouraged after I saw my score of 162. I've been averaging 165-166 and haven't scored this badly in months (even scored a low 170's last week). While RC and LG are typically my weaker sections, I was surprised to find that I didn't do too hot on LR on this exam, and noticed that the LR seemed much more difficult and vague.

I watched PowerScore's prediction video about this upcoming test and they said that LR stimuli and question stems have been deviating from set formulas in recent years. However, I took PT83 last week and got a 166, so maybe I just had an off day last night? Has anyone taken PT84 and had a similar experience (LR seemed more difficult, esp. in comparison to other recent exams), or is it more likely I just had an off day?

If it comes down to it, I can take January's exam as well if I need to, but I'd also like to apply as early as possible. I'm taking PT82 tomorrow so I'll see how that goes. Best of luck to anyone else taking the test on Saturday!

I know this seems bizarre, but I am consistently doing better on RC sections that I drill online rather than ones I have printed out from the official PTs... The only explanation I can come up with is that the printed RCs are always tiny and really dark, which makes it harder to read, which may in turn be reducing my comprehension and speed. Does anyone else experience this difference?