Finally hit 170...

Comments

• sillllyxo Alum Member

  September 2017 edited September 2017 708 karma

  RC was very very hard on PT 81. Recently took one and I got -4 took PT 81 and got -9. SMH.
• LSATcantwin Alum Member Sage ⭐

  September 2017 13286 karma

  Sufficent Assumption - If you score -7 in reading comp on PT 70 and PT 81 then fk RC.

  Now your conclusion can be properly drawn.

  Also - Reading comp for me is this weird entity....it's either easy or hard. Nothing in between, and for whatever reason I don't line up with the consensus. Went -4 on PT 81's RC...and didn't think it too be that bad.
• 1 Like

  TheMikey Alum Member

  September 2017 4196 karma

  @LSATcantwin said:
  Sufficent Assumption - If you score -7 in reading comp on PT 70 and PT 81 then fk RC.

  Now your conclusion can be properly drawn.

  Also - Reading comp for me is this weird entity....it's either easy or hard. Nothing in between, and for whatever reason I don't line up with the consensus. Went -4 on PT 81's RC...and didn't think it too be that bad.

  haha.. hmm let me diagram that...

  -7 RC --> fuck RC
  or maybe the contrapositive? /fuck RC --> /-7RC
• Freddy_D Core Member ⭐

  September 2017 2983 karma

  Congrats on that 170 though! That's no small feat!
• 1 Like

  Paul Caint Alum Member ⭐

  September 2017 edited September 2017 3521 karma

  The RC passages, and particularly PT 81 (I took it yesterday), are very good at putting in information that sounds right but was never said. They typically do this by talking about what one group believes.

  AKA - a passage talks about "constructionists" and "evolutionists." Contructionists believe that the constitution should be interpreted as to the Framers' original intent. Evolutionists believe that the constitution is a living document, and should be interpreted to modern circumstance.

  An incorrect answer choice may say something like:

  "Evolutionists believe that the text of the constitution should be altered to fit modern situations."

  ^Tempting right? BUT WRONG!

  The passage never said that evolutionists wanted to CHANGE THE TEXT, they just believed it should be INTERPRETED differently.

  Felt like there was a lot of this on PT 81!!!
• StellaBlue Alum Member

  September 2017 185 karma

  @"Paul Caint" That was a really helpful observation, and one I've been struggling to explain myself. Thanks for putting it in words!