Weaken, SA, and NA questions.

goalis180

Hey guys,
I am struggling with weakening questions, SA questions, and NA questions. I bought JY's starter package, and I am currently on the weakening questions section, and I am missing something, I just do not know what it really is. If it helps I am struggling more on the ones that are slightly hard, and just plain out hard. I know the term "hard" is so subjective, but I guess what I mean is that I am not struggling with the ones that are obvious. Is there something I can do to improve on this section? or if you guys can give me any pointers that would be great. I currently study about 4-5hrs sometimes more, about everyday, and if I am not studying I am reading online on how to approach certain questions, and how to progress in my understanding of the LSAT. What I am trying to project is that I am dedicated, motivated, and I really want a 99th percentile score. I do not like to be average, or just above average. So please, if you guys have any hints, tips, suggestions please let me know, anything that can help is greatly appreciated.

brna0714

Ok, the key to improve LR (IMO) is to get crystal clear on the argument structure and what the question is asking you to do. What is the stimulus trying to get us to believe and what pieces of information are they putting together to get us to buy into the conclusion? Additionally, you've got to be clear on what is "noise," extra information thrown in to distract and confuse.

Once you're clear on the stimulus, the next step is getting clear on the specific task at hand. All of this is, of course, a huge oversimplification and way easier said than done in some cases.

Weaken: You must weaken the *existing* relationship between the premises and the stimulus. It may also help to defer judgement on these for a little while until you can be very certain of why an answer is incorrect. Sometimes the correct answer will appear to be unrelated to the argument until it's reviewed carefully.

NA: Once you've eliminated everything but serious contenders (see above), use the negation test. If applied correctly, this will give you the correct answer every time. If you negate a necessary assumption, the argument must fall apart. Otherwise, it wasn't necessary.

SA: It must fill a gap and make the argument irefuttable. Usually you can find a term shift or disconnect, the piece that connects these two will be your SA.

Just as an aside- I'd venture to say that a good number of "law school types" are highly motivated, dedicated and would like to score in the 99th percentile on the LSAT. It's a hard test and improvements do not always come easily.

I'm not making any presumptions about your attitude here but @"Jonathan Wang" posted something that may provide some food for thought. I know that prep can be frusturating and I found his post very refreshing. Hope this stuff help!

http://7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/2895/the-most-important-lsat-prep-decision-you-will-make

mpits001

This was how I felt when I first started studying for the LSAT. Flawed and Weakening questions were the hardest questions for me. Eventually, though, I started to get the hang of the questions by noticing the patterns in the weakening/flawed questions. Now these are my best question types (usually going 90-100% on them.) You can research all the methods people use to attack them, but what it will come down to, is getting wrong answers and looking at the video explanations. The more weakening question you do the more you'll see the patterns. A lot of people who get really good at this question type (or the test in general), usually have an idea what weakens the argument before even getting to the questions. I know that seems a bit far-fetched, but it's true and naturally comes to you as you study for the test.

goalis180

Thank you guys for your input, I really appreciate you taking the time to respond to the post. @brna0714 I thought the same thing about the "law school types" when I was looking for a study partner, but let me tell you, I came across some people who studied for like a week, took the test, scored 153, and were ecstatic about the 153, and how much effort they put in to get it lol. I also looked at the post earlier today, I think I am fine, I am not demoralized, rather I am motivated to understand what I lack knowledge of, and I already accepted that I do not understand logic perfectly, nor understand English, but thank you for you response I greatly appreciate it. If you have anymore tips for me, please do not hesitate to give them to me lol, I could use them all. @mpits001, Thanks for the reassurnace, I am glad it is only because this is the beginning stage. I have 6 months until my LSAT Administration, and I am ready to put in the hard work to perfect my weaknesses.

brna0714

Great! Good luck to you. I hope you get it figured out.

goalis180

Thank you, I am sure I will.

nicole.hopkins

@mpits001 said:
Flawed and Weakening questions were the hardest questions for me. Eventually, though, I started to get the hang of the questions by noticing the patterns in the weakening/flawed questions. Now these are my best question types (usually going 90-100% on them.)

I have been in the same boat—having serious weaknesses draw our attention to them. These are good question types to struggle with as I believe success with these QT's strengthens skills generally necessary for overall LR success (and refines the reasoning abilities of the mind). I typically indicate the major premise and conclusion with a vertical line and "P" or "C" and try to hone in on the gap or the flaw—then either seek to name it (for Flaw) or exploit it (for Weaken).

So, OP, you're in a good position to become a master of these QT's Know that it is possible to master these and that mastery is a product of commitment to honesty about your level of understanding/confidence, and time/practice.

opal104

I appreciate a variety of discussions however thus far, the one on weakening in particular. I am struggling to pick out the weakening relationship when it comes to the relationship. Some are def easier than others to pick out but its an area I would like more info on:)

goalis180

@nicole.hopkins Thank you for the wise words, motivation to continue improving everyday is always appreciated. I am starting to get the hang of the questions, however I still must improve on the more complex stimuli which kind of shake me up and distract me with like a bajillion relationships that I feel like I have to keep track of. @opal104 Honestly, its really just a gap in the argument that you have to concentrate on to get better at these types of questions. however, to find the gap you must master being able to understand what is the conclusion, premises, and context, for if you have not mastered this skill yet, then you must practice because, truly, this skill is the bread and butter of the LSAT.

nicole.hopkins

@goalis180 said:
I still must improve on the more complex stimuli which kind of shake me up and distract me with like a bajillion relationships that I feel like I have to keep track of.

This will improve with practice! Keep your head up—the road is long and sometimes arduous, but it's going somewhere you want to go.

goalis180

Thank you, nicole. I think when I am feeling pressured, I might PM you for some motivation lollol.

nicole.hopkins

@goalis180 Any time!!!

goalis180

Thank you, I appreciate that.