I am getting absolutely destroyed on MBT/MBF/SA/PSA questions. I have two questions for you all...

Blake Morris

I am unsure of what the problem is. I believe it may be an insufficient ability to translate English into Lawgic. Often times the ones I seem to get correct, my English---->Lawgic translation is incorrect.

I would like to continue through the course and just keep this weakness in the back of my mind. But I also would not like to do that at my own detriment. My questions are as follows:

1) Where can I go to practice these English ----> Lawgic translations without wasting the precious resources of actual problem sets.

2) Can I just go through the rest of the course while working on that and then return the MBT/SA questions at a later date?

This_is_Hard

I'm in the same boat, got destroyed on the module of "More MBT questions". Whats helped for me is to take the problem set untimed. For my next step would be to start taking the problem sets timed with extra time than slowly decrease the time without my accuracy taking a hit.

The Great White Shark

I remember this stage of my studying. I think what Richard said is important. I wouldn't even consider the timing element until after you are doing well translating. Are you using the logic flashcards in the course? If you haven't already, try drilling those until you get them all correct. And then getting them correct under time.

Another thing you can try is translating any conditional statements you come across when reading books, articles or hearing people talk. Try creating contrapositives for conditionals too. It is just a matter of getting your brain used to thinking in that manner and creating neural pathways.

Logic is extremely important and foundational for the LSAT so I would recommend taking a few weeks to drill translations before moving on.

Amit.Dhaka

review validity and invalid arguments.

Trusttheprocess

Few things:

1) There are different types of MBT/SA/PSA, etc. They dont all just strickly test your "logic conditionality chains"

2) Once you start seeing how they are a bit different - then you can really anticipate what AC will be called upon. The LSAT is very cookie cutter and predicatble in these questions. They have a certain "playbook" that they follow and it has not changed.

For example:
PT 34 - S2 - Q2: I consider this a principle SA, in which you are trying to "better something", theres a quality missing. Your core conditionality skills will not be tested here.

PT - 35 -S1Q22: Conditionality SA - make sure you know how to link up and always contrapositive is game!

PT 22 - S4Q5 - Is a MBT SA... something needs to be MBT in order to reach to your conclusion.

This is a small glimpse of what I mean to pay attention to the SAs and there types b/c different core skills are being called upon to answer these questions.

3) You need to know your valid and invalid arguments not 100%, but 200%. This is especially true in the MBT/MBF questions (especially in those questions where you have the some, most, etc.)

Let me know if you have any questions... you can DM.
Cheers!