Why do people say Asian students are good at LG?

LSATaker · October 2016

Is it because of math?
How is math related to LG?

Not Ralph Nader · October 2016

Because there is this guy, I cannot remember his name started with J I guess who solved each and everyone of the games with great explanation check him out he is on YouTube

LSATaker · October 2016

@"Not Ralph Nader"
lol
No, seriously...
I wonder why people think Asian students are good at LG...a prof (Chinese professor) I met said no prob on LG, but...why he said so??
I don't see any perticular math related problem...

Jonathan Wang · October 2016

LG really is just a dressed-up math problem because logic is just a branch of mathematics; just go look at any university course catalog for an abstract logic class and see what department it's classed under.

As for why people say it - it's because people love making racist, heavily-stereotyped statements about Asian people.

LSATaker · October 2016

@"Jonathan Wang"
Actually, I saw it's under philosophy department...is this class helpful for LSAT logic??

Btw if it's math problem, shouldn't students focus on quality instead of quantity? After all hard questions are just combinations of easier questions...if it's math.
I don't know this applies to LG cuz sounds like people are doing so many games to do well.

inactive · October 2016

@"Jonathan Wang" said:
it's because people love making racist, heavily-stereotyped statements about Asian people.

http://24.media.tumblr.com/07e8af495862d33646cdf071e06688fc/tumblr_mnyyiffbua1qlt87mo2_r3_500.gif

blah blah · October 2016

@LSATaker
Actually, I saw it's under philosophy department...is this class helpful for LSAT logic??

Btw if it's math problem, shouldn't students focus on quality instead of quantity? After all hard questions are just combinations of easier questions...if it's math.
I don't know this applies to LG cuz sounds like people are doing so many games to do well.

To your original question, stereotypes that stem from racism. The suggestion isn't so much related to the nature of mathematics, but rather the idea that Asians, in virtue of being Asian, are good at doing things mechanically over and over again (i.e., good at the way in which many people get good at high-school math and logic games). My diagnostic was -0 in RC and -8 in LG, lol.

Regarding your logic course being listed under the philosophy department, this is fine. Philosophy majors at my school are required to take a logic course in the philosophy department and it's cross-listed with math and comp sci. courses (so, math/comp. sci. majors take a logic class that's taught in the philosophy department.) Taking that course should be sufficient for the LSAT – and will likely go over and beyond what's needed. (Assuming it's a symbolic/propositional/first-order logic class, and not just here-are-some-fallacies course)

Alex · October 2016

@LSATaker said:
Is it because of math?
How is math related to LG?

I've never heard anyone say "Asians are good at logic games." That would be a super-specific stereotypical comment, though.

@LSATaker said:
Actually, I saw it's under philosophy department...is this class helpful for LSAT logic??

Btw if it's math problem, shouldn't students focus on quality instead of quantity? After all hard questions are just combinations of easier questions...if it's math.
I don't know this applies to LG cuz sounds like people are doing so many games to do well.

I think the reason many people would recommend doing a great quantity of games is binary. First, there are so many different variations of games that the way to solve them efficiently is by recognizing game breaking inferences. And the only way to really develop these deductive reasoning skills is to see and solve many of the variations of games. The second reason is speed. You want to get really fast at these games. After all, the LSAT is a timed exam. So doing a lot of them is a great way to expose yourself to the many different variations of say grouping games while also working on your speed/inference making skills.

Also, I don't think quality and quantity are necessarily mutual exclusive. I also think students should focus on quality. That is why the 7Sage fool proof method to a perfect score on LG instructs students to constantly redo problems until they can solve them under time, get a perfect score on, and feel like they "own the game." So quality review of the LG section is just as important.

Heart Shaped Box · October 2016

I'm Asian (I think..?) lol but I was horrible at games. I still wouldn't claim I am good at them now, but a lot better than before. Though I do think having a mathematical/engineering background would help. My totally white buddy (non-Asian) who has a engineering degree is much MUCH more intuitive on those games. He wasn't even taking the LSAT, never seen any of them before, and I showed him some of the games (Miscellaneous ones) that were really hard for me (at the time), he was talking himself thru it while reading the stimulus/rules, and then he figured it out. He didn't solve it or anything, but he figured out the game board and told me how to diagram it, which is exactly the same reasoning as in JY's explanation. Now, he was a little slower than LSAT required timing, and probably will make small errors on details if he were to go in all the way solving them. But then again, he wasn't trained to do this at all and has never seen LSAT before. So you can only imagine for ppl like him with proper training and some practice, he'll master games in no time.

But he did suck at reading. I showed him a passage, he read like 3 lines and goes "fu$k it" lol

My point is, I don't think it's simply a matter of race but one's strong point in academic background. If you are a engineering major, you "might" be more intuitive on sections like LG, if you are a history major, reading comp "may be" your thing. For someone like me who is good at nothing (still Asian), I just have to work my ass off extra hard to compensate for the shortage of those natural talents. lol

LSATaker · October 2016

Ahh thanks for your answers guys, didn't expect I will get this many replies so glad

I'm not that good at math neither actually so seems like I'll just have to work hard...

dennisgerrard · October 2016

Answer: Stereotype.

As an Asian(Chinese), I'm good at math but not at LG initially. LG requires accuracy and consistency .

nessa.k13.0 · October 2016

LOL @"Not Ralph Nader"

Yeah, Jonathan said it best:

@"Jonathan Wang" said:
because people love making racist, heavily-stereotyped statements about Asian people.

Friends don't let friends spread ignorance. Definitely pass this^ along to whomever is telling you that.

nantesorkestar · October 2016

I don't know. I'm Jewish and pretty decent at LG. Maybe I'm Asian too?

Probably not.

Alejandro · October 2016

@"Jonathan Wang" I get your point, but isn't logic a branch of philosophy?

tomiwa.bo · October 2016

@LSATaker Hey! I actually took a logic course with my school's philosophy department. The material is mostly irrelevant to LG. I'd advise consultation with the professor before enrollment.

LSATaker · October 2016

@tomiwa.bo Oh...thanks, I'll talk with my prof then

And thanks for the additional comments!

Cant Get Right · October 2016

@Alejandro said:
isn't logic a branch of philosophy?

I think they definitely overlap. Philosophy in spirit, math in practice.

blah blah · October 2016

@"Cant Get Right" said:
@Alejandro said:
isn't logic a branch of philosophy?

I think they definitely overlap. Philosophy in spirit, math in practice.

They do overlap (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-classical/#1), though the suggestion that logic is math in practice is misleading. There's just many different types of logic, some of which that do not have any application in math (http://plato.stanford.edu/search/searcher.py?query=logic). It also can't be taken for granted that math is logic (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/philosophy-mathematics/#Log)

quinnxzhang · October 2016

@"Jonathan Wang" said:
logic is just a branch of mathematics

Oh man, don't tell the mathematicians this.

There's a somewhat famous story about Paul Cohen (mathematician) looking down on logicians and trivializing their work. In response, some logicians challenged him to answer one of the unsolved problems of logic at the time: is the continuum hypothesis independent of ZFC? To their dismay, Cohen took their challenge and proved that the continuum hypothesis was indeed independent of ZFC, developing a completely novel (and now widely used) technique called forcing in the process!

In any case, I think this discussion about whether logic is more math or philosophy is pretty irrelevant to the original question because LSAT logic games have little to do with the academic study of logic in the first place. Rather, the kind of precise, rigorous thinking involved in solving LGs is similar to the kind of thinking involved in studying logic/math/CS/related fields.

blah blah · October 2016

@quinnxzhang said:
In any case, I think this discussion about whether logic is more math or philosophy is pretty irrelevant to the original question because LSAT logic games have little to do with the academic study of logic in the first place. Rather, the kind of precise, rigorous thinking involved in solving LGs is similar to the kind of thinking involved in studying logic/math/CS/related fields.

The distinction is definitely irrelevant for the LSAT, though conditional/in-out games will likely be easier if you have taken a class on first-order logic (e.g., I didn't have to go through any of the logic related lessons in the syllabus and, while I was terrible at most logic games, I found any game involving conditionals to be straightforward). To be more precise, the disconnect between the a basic logic class in college and the LSAT logic games is that for the latter, you have to be writing and making inferences quickly and efficiently – things that are a bit superficial in the former.

Jonathan Wang · October 2016

@quinnxzhang said:
There's a somewhat famous story about Paul Cohen (mathematician) looking down on logicians and trivializing their work. In response, some logicians challenged him to answer one of the unsolved problems of logic at the time: is the continuum hypothesis independent of ZFC? To their dismay, Cohen took their challenge and proved that the continuum hypothesis was indeed independent of ZFC, developing a completely novel (and now widely used) technique called forcing in the process!

Eek. Yeah, might not want to stir that hornet's nest. I might get intellect-shamed to death

Agree generally that the distinction is mostly irrelevant for the LSAT. I think the comment about the analytical thought process is much more spot on than just a flat "philosophy or math" categorization.

But really, I think I posted mostly so I could get some snark in here about how Asian people are constantly stereotyped, and nobody seems to notice. Chris Rock made an Asian sweatshop joke at the Oscars this year (which was supposed to be a protest against the lack of diversity in Hollywood, for those who don't remember), and then followed it up with a joke about Asian kids being accountants. For christ's sake, man.

Cant Get Right · October 2016

@"Jonathan Wang" said:
Chris Rock made an Asian sweatshop joke at the Oscars this year (which was supposed to be a protest against the lack of diversity in Hollywood, for those who don't remember), and then followed it up with a joke about Asian kids being accountants. For christ's sake, man.

Yeah, that was really bad. Race can be a legitimate object of comedy, but it really depends on how it's dealt with and what the underlying meaning of a joke is. If it doesn't have any meaning deeper than throwing around a racist stereotype, then it's kind of just a racist stereotype. Chris Rock really fucked up with that one. It's interesting that some racism is considered more or less in/appropriate depending on the group in question.

nessa.k13.0 · October 2016

Yeah, that Chris Rock Oscars joke left a bad taste in my mouth. He completely failed to address the issue of representation on the big screen in a meaningful way. Racism towards Asians is definitely an issue that is overlooked. It sucks that it is excused because some people think it is a complement.

@"Cant Get Right" said:
It's interesting that some racism is considered more or less in/appropriate depending on the group in question.

Yeah I think that's unfortunate for the general public that this is the rub. Some comedians have provided pretty hilarious and insightful comedy about race and how it differs/what is excused in America. Aziz Ansari, Trevor Noah, Ronny Chieng, and Jessica Williams have some great pieces on race.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

Related Discussions

Why do people say Asian students are good at LG?

Why do they care whether applicants have relatives at the school they are applying?For example, do you have family member working as stuff at XX law school etc... why do they ask this? If they do have, does this mean it affects th…

PT 2 S2 Question 4 Can I infer some people are -P from the statement that most people are P?Can I infer some are -P from the statement that most people are P? I think saying most people are mortal does not mean some people are immortal, but …

LG- Good at inferences, bad at diagrammingHey everyone, The title says it all. I'm hardcore struggling with LG right now. Specifically on in/out games. I would say I'm pretty good at getti…

First Blind Review - Need Help for Questions I couldn't get (instructors and people good at LR !)First of all, I'd like to apologize if this isn't the correct place to ask this, but in the lesson J.Y. said to ask someone who knows more than you, …

how much do you study? what do you do to focus?i generally study at least 3 hours a day. i felt that 3 hours a day would be sufficient for me because i am fast learner and my attention span does n…

Comments