Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Apply for Membership

Categories

Ye ole "Bible"

MoosaderMoosader Alum Member
in General 234 karma
So, despite my confident suspicion that 7sage pwns PowerScore, I still bought the LR Bible cuz it was "only" $40 bucks. But, after having read the first couple chapters, I am totes concerned. I have read multiple "How I got a 180" etc. articles, and a lot of those people used powerscore. Bless their hearts because dang doe. In two chapters I have gotten a lot of the basics which I guess are necessary for the first 2 chapters. But it seems that the way this book is mapped out, where its heading, is extremely inefficient and odd (categorization), though admittedly quite exhaustive. (Exhaustive at this point is what I am looking for. I have finished the Trainer and twas excellent, but I need some more detes on my weak question types).

Given my circumstance, am I going to benefit from the time I put into this book? I really do prefer book learning to video learning, for multiple reasons---time efficiency being one of them. I would like to keep the Trainer as my main template and incorporate detes from LR Bible. My LR is pretty low, too low to be honest about publicly. But I have only done one PT, and a lot will come naturally with practice and mental endurance. However, I would hate to establish bad habits in PTing or inefficient habits in theory with the Bible. I am taking the October LSAT and completely plan on 170 or 173 +, and I am studying more than full time.

Punchline: Do I continue with the LR Bible? will it give me new insights and the deh-tails I need to fill specific, tiny wholes in the Trainer, even if its overall structure is wackasblackcrackonthesalerack?
Show Related Discussions

Comments

  • PacificoPacifico Alum Inactive ⭐
    8021 karma
    The Trainer/7Sage combo is pretty comprehensive in my opinion. I'm sure you can find people who used every imaginable study resource to get a 180 so that is essentially meaningless. You could eventually find someone that got a 180 on their diagnostic without even studying at all. That doesn't mean that not studying is a good idea, so I wouldn't put too much stock into one particular methodology over another. The real need is for you to develop deep fundamental understandings of reasoning and argument structure. Everything else is secondary to that.
  • MoosaderMoosader Alum Member
    234 karma
    I definitely have all the fundamentals from the Trainer. I am just curious about more specifics for question type strategy to compliment Cambridge.
  • PacificoPacifico Alum Inactive ⭐
    8021 karma
    I'm actually thinking about testing out the read the stimulus first strategy to parse out the argument/reasoning (if any) in order to develop a deeper understanding rather than reading the question stem first to color my perspective.
  • MoosaderMoosader Alum Member
    234 karma
    Yeah,me too. I think it's interesting, but I have a feeling I'm going to go back to stem first. Like the Trainer says, I don't want to waste at minimum 5 seconds per question analyzing an argument I don't need to or even worse re-reading the stim because I failed to read in the way the stem wanted. There;s definitely serious pros and cons to both.
  • PacificoPacifico Alum Inactive ⭐
    8021 karma
    Well I'm thinking if you read it and there is no argument or no flaw, then you should already have narrowed down what the possible question stems could be. It should be an interesting experiment regardless. I think I did my diagnostic that way and did better in LR than anything else, but it was so long ago I'm not 100% sure that was the case.
  • c.janson35c.janson35 Free Trial Inactive Sage Inactive ⭐
    2398 karma
    I personally read the stimulus first. I don't think there is truly a different way to read the stimuli based on question type. Here me out: if your reasoning skills are strong enough then you should know right away when a stimulus is just a set of facts rather than an argument, so you wouldn't waste any time being critical about these questions when they call for objectivity. The majority of remaining questions types all boil down to the same process: identify conclusion and premises, then figure out why it all doesn't add up by identifying the flaw. Whether you are strengthening or weakening, looking for a SA or NA, the correct answer choice always hinges upon the identification of flawed reasoning.

    Also, not reading the question stem first has allowed me to almost predict which kind of question type is going to follow. For example, main point questions for the most part seem to be written in a certain style, so much so that I find myself reading the stimulus up until the conclusion in these types, and once I've identified the conclusion I have a habit of glancing down to verify that it is a main point question.

    I will say that reading the stem first does help a lot in agree/disagree questions, and since these are easy to identify visually, I do read the stem first on these questions.

    This isn't to say that I believe always reading the stem first is the wrong approach, if it's helpful for you then that's all that matters, really. But I am skeptical that reading the stem first influences the way you evaluate the stimulus.
  • DumbHollywoodActorDumbHollywoodActor Alum Inactive ⭐
    7468 karma
    For me, it’s about time management. I can usually do main point, agree/diagree, paradox, and some argument part questions in about 20-30 seconds. I have found that that is vital for me if I have any chance of getting the LR section done on time. I’m essentially buying more time to work on the Weaken, NA, and Parallel questions, which I have a hard time getting done in under 1:20. I think if I read the stimulus first, it wouldn’t be nearly as fast at the former.
  • DrackedaryDrackedary Member
    239 karma
    I have completed the Powerscore LR Bible, and I also prefer reading from books than watching videos generally. That said, I find 7Sage better. I don't think you'll miss anything from the Bible that isn't covered by 7Sage, and I find JY's explanations on theory and actual questions to be more easily understandable.

    I don't think the LR Bible is a bad product - it's just not as effective as 7Sage for me. For the time efficiency issue, don't forget you can make the videos go 1.2x or even 1.4x faster and you should still be able to follow.
Sign In or Register to comment.