I agree that I most certainly need to take a break from the LSAT, which I am. However, in the mean time I'm trying to work on logic or establishing validity. I've done numerous random worksheets online and in this course on validity and logic. 8/10, I'm getting the logic right as far as drawing valid conclusions and negating statements, drawing could be true and must be true inferences from the logic. However, although I am seemingly able to to identify the the valid and invalid argument forms when it's in its form (for example, A--->B, A--m--> B, etc.), I have a hard time consistently identifying them when I see them in REAL LR questions. Why is that? Almost every quiz I take on drawing valid conclusions, I pretty much nail it. But when it comes to the LR questions such as SA and MBT, or even parallel flaw/reasoning questions, I tend to get the answer wrong. Why is that? Is this normal?
Comments
Do you mean you get them if you see them as symbols (A, as opposed to words and phrases that you need to translate? I think the identification of what the "symbols" are is its own skill that also needs to be worked on. English doesn't always want to fit nicely into A, B, and C. If you go really slow for a LR question, try to translate each idea into its own symbol. Then evaluate the logic behind the question.
Fallout 4 comes out today ... Go play that for 2 weeks solid and then come back and talk to us about validity (but no spoilers please!)