Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
mattscrappy
About
- Username
- mattscrappy
- Joined
- Visits
- 176
- Last Active
- Roles
- Member
Comments
-
When is your test? Older tests are still valuable for some content and structure but aren't representative of what you'll probably see on your real LSAT. You should prioritize new tests if you have limited time and/or as it gets closer to your actua…
-
There are always exceptions, but, in general, no. How would restating the premise actually help the argument? We are already to assume that every premise in the stimulus is true, so restating it won't bridge any existing logic gaps. It's essentially…
-
A proper admissions consultant could help you more, but mentioning your scholarship at the state school might be a good idea. Letting them know you are very interested in this out of state school (i.e., I would really like to go here, your program…
-
I'm not sure how much this will help, but based on the language you're using its possible you're approaching them merely as Strengthen questions, not PSA/SA questions. A strengthen AC doesn't need to make the conclusion logically follow (be 100% acc…
-
This a formal logic SA question, so you're looking for an answer that connects the concepts together. AC B is the only thing that does that. Practical intelligence is a skill that won't develop on its own, and therefore if something has everything…
-
@Ashley2018 I think this came down to the details. In the stimulus, the "inspectors" only applied to the "unsalable" items; they did not not inspect the "recycled" items. So even if they over report defective items, it doesn't matter because they ar…
-
Paraphrasing is a great tool sometimes, and a time sink other times. For me, I decided that the right answer would probably highlight a difference in the two groups (7% vs 9%), but I also know that trying to think of all the possible ways they could…
-
Could be anecdotal, but personally I find that reading the passage for the joy of learning something new helps me retain the content better while still reading it quickly. Every time I've tried to read it for structure (like I read LR), I end up c…
-
Like everyone here, definitely not! It won't help you improve your abilities, but it might break your confidence for tomorrow if you don't do great on it. Only potential benefit is it might boost your confidence if you crush it, but IMO, Risk v. Rew…
-
Assuming you mean PT92.S1.Q16? If yes, then this is a PSA question, so the answer needs to prove the conclusion. You're making a bunch of assumptions above - is it really implied that people shouldn't be getting tickets? No, that is the conclusion…
-
Based on your work and study schedule, and that you went to a funeral very recently (an emotionally traumatic event) it wouldn't surprise me if you were burnt out. I was in a similar boat this past June, right before the test I took. Here is my advi…
-
I also picked A originally, but got that feeling that I knew something was wrong with it. Once it showed me AC C as being correct, it clicked and I thought"oh right, what if the instruction has always been bad?" The only thing that the evidence ac…
-
If you're able to connect with the main point of a law article but not the individual evidence, then you might not be reading each paragraph thoughtfully enough. You clearly understand the article as a whole, but not the individual pieces of evidenc…
-
@yellowfinsalmon It sounds like you're relying only on Q stem keywords, so think the habit you need to develop is working "flow of information" and "Q stem keywords" in tandem. You still need to take the content and keywords of the Q stem into accou…
-
I'm not is a spot to watch the video, but based only on your question: IMO calling them minor flaws/major flaws sounds like its more rhetorical than actually useful, so it may help to consider them "relevant flaws" vs. "irrelevant flaws" You could…
-
Like everyone else here, I'll say that logic games will give you the best return so spend most of your drilling improving on that section. But, you'll need to break it up a bit so you don't go crazy in which case I would add a bit of LR training a…
-
I think that you actually have it backwards! Understanding the Q stems won't make it easier to see the direction to flow of information, but understanding the flow of information will make it easier to understand the Q stem. Go through some examples…
-
@Jagbirh said: @Kris4444 said: This is all great advice. Something that helped me that hasn't been mentioned yet is memorizing the 21 common flaws. Know what they're called, what it means, and most importantly: WHY it makes the arg…
-
Yes, absoultely. One of the factors that makes this test difficult is stamina. It can only benefit you to start completing four full sections at once. I know you claim stamina won't be an issue, and of course I'm not sure what your study method is l…
-
Same boat, high 160's, low 170's. Super high BR scores that I'd like to make my actual score!
-
Hopefully it's not too late! With such a big fluctuation in your average scores, it sounds like you might not always understand the stimulus/conclusion? I had this problem too when I started, and a thing that helped me is that you should really foc…
-
Tagging on to all the great advice in this thread - something that helped me improve was going through any question (untimed) containing an argument and trying to identify the flaw without looking at any ACs. Nearly all questions in LR with an argum…
-
The map out of the conditionality is "If harm was intended or forethought could have prevented harm, then an action is morally bad." BUT, we only know that this applies if there actually is harm. We don't know if an action intended to harm but does…
-
I know you may be joking, but remember this is a Strengthen question, not a Sufficient Assumption question. The correct answer doesn't need to prove the conclusion, just help it more than any of the other AC's. In this specific question the other …
-
Answer choice B pins advancements in speed and efficiency on the outcome of current research projects (one of which may be the peptide project). This doesn't work for two reasons: (1) It assumes that transistor size is the only way to increase spee…
-
Hi! 1) is invalid because it assumes the "some" statement of vanilla is definitely less than half. LSAT "some" can literealy mean 1-100%, so, while it could be true that most people (51-100%) prefer chocolate, it isn't necessarily true. 2) is va…