Have you taken this before, or tried a problem set? How did you do?
>>24926984I usually get a C on stuff like this
No but I have successfully entered and graduated from a probably roughly equivalent institution to a US law school, the King's Inns in Dublin. Finished roughly in the middle of the class.
>>24926984I have done many questions from the logical reasoning section. It's fun and it's a great way to learn about logic. You have many old tests available for free online, at least 90 of them:https://img.cracklsat.net/lsat/pt/pt1.pdf...https://img.cracklsat.net/lsat/pt/pt90.pdfThere are discussions and explanations of the questions online, just google them.There are also good videos, such as this playlist:https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLeamyERJVQLDHH0zijOOpqULKD6yU2UxeThere are books such as Manhattan Prep Logical Reasoning, and I believe other books for the other sections.https://www.amazon.com/Logical-Reasoning-Manhattan-Strategy-Guides/dp/1506265669(such books are also on libgen)I used to post threads about these questions on /pol/, some of the discussions were fun and rewarding. I don't have them all bookmarked or anything, but here are some:https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/503448915https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/500988287https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/503165697
As a wordcel, the logic games section killed me. Still got into my desired school, but it hurt my max scholarship.
>>24926984I got a 173.
I got a 164 but I only took it once
>>24927551>But I only took it once164 is a good score
>>24927692Not if you’re a middle class straight white man
>>24926984just do one of these a dayhttps://www.kaplanquizzes.com/lsat/?_gl=1*16hwffw*_gcl_au*MTY1MjE3MTE1OS4xNzU1MDQ1MzY0*_ga*NTIwODE2NjM5LjE3NTUwNDUzNjQ.*_ga_ZY80RZXW3M*czE3NTU0NDc4NjMkbzckZzEkdDE3NTU0NDc5MTUkajgkbDAkaDA.*_ga_QSZC68E0Y1*czE3NTU0NDc4NjMkbzkkZzEkdDE3NTU0NDc5MTUkajgkbDAkaDA.
>>24926984Doing problem sets changed my life, because I had never really considered the strength between a claim, the evidence and the conclusion. Once I started looking necessary and sufficient conditions, you could find the gaps in logic and assumptions made in an argument and I completely stopped being a leftist.
>>24927494The lowest score in the 99th percentile. Based. Me too.
>>24928747To be honest, I never really understood that kind of stuff. For this test I just went off intuition and was never truly sure about what I chose, but I still got a 174. I don't think I learned anything from that exam to this day
>>24928859do you do anything with that massive natural intelligence or just fuck around ?
Objection irrelevant
>>24929075B
>>24928859You don't really learn anything by just taking the test or doing questions. You learn by doing questions, and then going over the ones you answered wrong, looking up why you got them wrong, and by consuming media related to lsat prep, by discussing questions etc. They say you learn by teaching and I found that trying to help others understand why they got a question wrong deepened my own understanding. You don't know something very well if you can't make someone else understand it too.
>>24927742This, i got a 170 first try and i'm black
>>24926984Studied for about 5 months and managed to get a 170.It was fun but pretty stressful. Don't know how people consistently score 173+. I felt like I was at my absolute cognitive limits by the end.
>>24926984I'm a licensed attorney so I have but I don't remember my score anymore. I got a 329 on the UBE though.
>>24929148Yes. Do you know the technical name for the fallacy that's committed and can you point at where exactly the fallacy is committed?
Imagine how boring your life must be when all you care about is the scores. Muh grades, muh points, muh diplomas, muh dollars. Rats.
>>24931512Is it the fallacy of composition? The gas station owner is arguing that the pursuance of increased fuel efficiency (the whole) is bad because the consequences of shrinking vehicle sizes (a potential part of the whole) is bad.Either that or I suppose Appeal to Consequences in a broader sense.
>>24931553No, it's a formal fallacy.
>>24931563Affirming the consequent then? In a negative sense.
>>24931566>Affirming the consequentYes>In a negative sense.What do you mean?
>>24931566Or wait is it denying the antecedent I haven’t done logic in half a decade lol
>>24926984I got a 176 first and only attempt. I believe I was one of the last exams with logics games. I like those a lot. I got full ride offers from Mizzou, SMU. Significant scholarship to Lewis and Clarke. U Washington let me in but basically no scholarship. I think it's because I was out of state.I developed GERD from stressing about law school. I talked to the students during my tour and got a few to go to a bar with me. I got them drunk and they all sounded depressed. Insane amounts of debt. I never wanted to be a lawyer. I ended up not going.I read they took logic games out because blacks couldn't do them. kek. new tests make more sense for lawyers though
>>24931569So if the basic structure of affirming the consequent isIf P -> QQ.Therefore, P.I was wondering if it would be more proper to render this with NOT!P and NOT!Q but I’m overthinking it heavily
>>24931571They took out logic games because blind people couldn't do them Also every 170+ strategy just relied on getting a perfect score on LG since it was the most learnable (but least intuitive) section and then fucking off for the rest of the exam.
I hate this fucking test. I don't even want to go to law school or be a lawyer but I have to get into a T20 or else I'll be disowned. I've been getting -2/-3 on individual timed LR sections but I just took my first PT and that shit went to -6/-7. About ~3 to 4 on each LR were due to reading issues
>>24931577I wouldn't want a blind lawyer kek. but I'm glad they took logic games out for them I guess.Logic games were very intuitive to me. but I have been a life long word puzzle/sudoku nerd. I went out and bought all the logic game practice books I could find. I still do them every morning for fun.Also yes I used last demon for my prep and I was lucky because I just had to focus on LR RC.Honestly I got a good score but I am a moron.
>>24931570Affirming the consequent and denying the antecedent are really one and the same, just two sides of the same coin. Semantically they're interchangeable, it's just a matter of how you word the argument. Both are about confusing necessity and sufficiency.>>24931572Don't know what you mean.https://youtu.be/lyHk1qwl0JICan you point at the exact point in the gas station owner's argument where the affirming the consequent is committed?
>>24931586https://libgen.li/index.php?req=manhattan+prep+lsat
If smaller cars, then increased fuel efficiency.Smaller cars.Therefore, increased fuel efficiency.
>>24926984>law school admission test is about logic>actual trial law practice is about fooling an irrational audience into thinking you're right
>>24931074did you end up going to law school?
>>24931571You should have applied to much better ranked schools than those with a 176. Unless your GPA was shit tier you could have gotten into a very good school on a scholarship.
>>24932007I meant to say:If smaller cars, then increased fuel efficiency.Increased fuel efficiency.Therefore, smaller cars.If P, then Q.Q.Therefore, P.Affirming the consequent.That's the fallacy the gas station owner is committing.
>>24932563>>24932565This is /lit/. Politely fuck off.
>>24926984Took a timed practice test once cause a friend of mine was studying for it. Post-logic games. Got a 168, she pissed.>t. finance bro
>>24933212Was she a poli-sci major?
>>24926984Got a 170 this September... kind of disappointed desu I might take a gap year after I graduate and try again
>>24926984I took the MCAT. Never had to study for CARS (Critical Analysis and Reading Skills), which is a lot of people's worst section. People say you can't study for it by reading difficult books, but I'm here to tell you that's bullshit.
>>24931590what about a blind judge
>>24933274Yes
>>24933979I knew it
Shit thread. Enjoy your ban.
This thread was moved to >>>/his/18217843
