LSAT Logic and "Ground Zero Mosque" Arguments, Part 2

This is the 2nd part of a 2-part series on LSAT Logic and the "Ground Zero Mosque."

In the 1st part, I analyze some arguments opposing Park51 and their connections to logical fallacies tested on the LSAT.

In this part, I offer counterarguments to other claims advanced by Park51 opponents.

Reactions to Various Arguments Against Park51

Claim that Ground Zero has Privileged Status as Sacred Ground

The site itself being "sacred ground" is certainly fair. However, New York is a living city. Some people go about their day-to-day lives next to Ground Zero. Cheap souvenir stands and strip clubs are in the immediate vicinity. Park51's short distance from both a strip club and an OTB suggests its backers are tolerant people.

Many non-New Yorkers seem to believe all of Lower Manhattan is a memorial with a 24/7 prohibition on business as usual. Things actually went back to normal soon after it was safe to return.

If it's to be a "victory mosque," it'll have to be much taller than 13 stories. Maybe 13 stories sounds big to those outside NYC, but if you've ever been to Wall St. or Lower Manhattan, you'll know many buildings down there are dozens of stories tall.

If you're creating a brand-new building in Manhattan, you're probably not going to bother making it less than 10 stories if zoning allows you to make it a decent size.

Manhattan's a pretty small island, and real estate tends to be expensive, so builders need all the vertical space they can get to make purchasing land worthwhile.

Park51 won't even be visible from Ground Zero (and vice-versa).

Furthermore, how does being sacred ground mean that one can't have a mosque a few blocks away? 2 long blocks away (the equivalent of 6 normal city blocks) is a decent distance when one considers how tiny Lower Manhattan is. If the ground is too sacred to have a community center containing a Muslim prayer space nearby, perhaps it's also too sacred to have 2 churches within one block. (At the very least, maybe those 2 churches can "protect" Ground Zero from Park51 or "cancel out" its Muslim influence.)

After all, if we're committing the part-to-whole flaw by lumping together moderates and extremists within a religion of over 1 billion people, we might as well extend it and blame religion in general for 9/11. Should we ban all churches and synagogues from Lower Manhattan as well? Since all the 9/11 hijackers were men (and since they were all humans), should we ban all men (and humans) from Lower Manhattan? After all, it's an insult to women (and animals) to have them walking around freely as if it were business as usual.

Sure, it'd be an insult to allow members of Al Qaeda to hold parties there, but let's not forget that Al Qaeda doesn't represent the wishes of all 1.5 billion Muslims.

The First Amendment does not allow for exceptions based on national tragedies. As The Daily Show reminded us, Charlton Heston held the national NRA convention in Denver one week after the Columbine High School shooting. His excellent keynote address discussed the connection between tragedy and blame and the resulting need to defend the Bill of Rights.

The Catholic Church placed a "Center for Dialogue and Prayer" the equivalent of 2 blocks from Auschwitz, and their center actually sounds rather nice.



Claim that the Name "Cordoba House" Symbolizes Triumphalism

Opponents latch on to the idea that calling the Islamic community center by the name "Cordoba House" is meant to invoke the Muslim conquest of the Spanish city of Cordoba.

Rauf says he chose the name to invoke 8th-11th century Cordoba, Spain, a period in which Muslims, Jews, and Christians lived in peace.

I suppose that if we knew nothing about him, we wouldn't know which interpretation to believe.

However, given his background and track record, it seems pretty clear that we should take him at his word.

Furthermore, he appeased opponents on this issue and changed the center's name to the very neutral Park51 (the building's address), which indicates some desire to compromise and avoid confusion.


Concern that We Don't Know How the Imam's Financing It

Some keep raising the question of how Rauf got the ~$4 million for the current buildings, and how he'll get the $100 million for the construction of Park51 itself. They suggest he might get money from conservative Muslim countries.

First, getting ~$4 million from a congregation to establish a new house of worship in NYC probably isn't very difficult. In NYC, donors have money, and wealthy people often donate to their houses of worship.

Second, people involved in fundraising often don't know where their money's coming from until the check arrives.

Third, is it that surprising that some of the money for an Islamic community center might come from an Muslim country? Are there not ties between Jewish organizations in the U.S. and Israeli organizations? Are there not ties between the Catholic Church in Vatican City and Catholic churches in the U.S.? Are there not ties between Prince Al-Waleed of Saudi Arabia, the News Corporation, and the Republican Party? (Prince Al-Waleed has also donated to Harvard and Andover, and I don't see them preaching shari'a.) Has George W. Bush not held hands with, and kissed, Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah?



Argument by Analogy that Saudi Arabia Doesn't Allow Churches

That doesn't seem to stop all the hand-holding, kissing, and exchanging of money referenced above.

Fox News keeps pushing the following idea:

"Since Saudi Arabia doesn't allow churches or synagogues, why should we allow mosques?"

Since Fox News and its guests keep putting words in the mouths of 9/11 victims, I'd argue it's insult to 9/11 victims to suggest that we should become more like Saudi Arabia, especially near the site of the World Trade Center.

Discouraging Muslims from exercising their right to build a mosque on private property, based on the idea that neither Saudi Arabia nor Al Qaeda is big on religious freedom, suggests we should lower ourselves to their standard.

In other words, these Park51 opponents suggest we become more like religious extremists and discourage the free exercise of religion, making ourselves more like the people we find abhorrent, not less.



Claim that the Government Should Stop Them From Building

According to a recent Fox News poll, 34% of registered voters believe they do not have the right to build it. For those people, the issue is the legal right.

Just in case anyone's not clear on this, government is not in the business of deciding what sort of speech or religion is "right" or "wrong." It's in the business of allowing and protecting the free exercise of speech and religion.

People's opinions on what's morally right, good, decent, or offensive vary significantly, making opinions regarding decency an unreliable source of authority.

While laws are also open to interpretation, the text of a particular law is (relatively) fixed.

We can't make policy based upon what Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin, or Fox News consider to be an acceptable distance from Ground Zero.

Apparently, a few blocks away isn't far enough for them, but at what distance does one say "new mosques can be built north of this particular street, but not south of it?" Where do we draw the line? For how long should that policy remain in effect? Should one's freedoms be dependent upon the popularity of their expression in a particular community?

Following that policy exposes everyone to the tyranny of the majority.



Concern that the Imam Has Not Condemned Hamas / Terrorism

This recent article in the New York Times pretty much covers it.



Claim that 9/11 Victims' Families Don't Want It There

Sure, some don't. But many do. Those who do might be offended if Park51 were not built. Whatever happens, some victims' families will be offended, so we can't satisfy everyone's desires.

And then, of course, there's the issue that the First Amendment does not allow exceptions for simply offending someone.



Claim that Islam is a Violent Religion

Opponents of Park51 often claim Islam is a violent religion, contrary to expressions of peace by many of its members.

Sure, the Qur'an says some things I don't care for, but the Hebrew Bible and New Testament also endorse plenty of hateful and backwards stuff. If you're going to apply strict scrutiny to the Qur'an (and assume that all members of a religion actively endorse every word of their religion's texts), you're obligated to do the same for other religions. Religion today is not the same as religion in the time these texts were written.

Since the texts of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all endorse violence against nonbelievers, one might reach the conclusion that it wouldn't be decent for any religion to establish houses of worship near Ground Zero. However, no one really follows most of the prescriptions of their religious texts. Furthermore, how many people do you know who actually read their own religion's text, let alone obey a majority of its commandments?


Claim that Building Park51 Lets The Terrorists Win

Imam Rauf's proposed Islamic interfaith community center presents one of the greatest threats to Al Qaeda. It proves that Muslims can happily and successfully live in American society, in peace with neighbors, without oppression from government or from non-Muslims.

All the vitriol against Park51 serves as a recruitment opportunity for Al Qaeda. (Yes, the rest of the world has heard about the controversy.)

On the other hand, Park51 were to be built, it'd serve as a great symbol of American tolerance - proof that America is not at war with the religion of Islam.


For further watching:

Daily Show: The Parent Company Trap

Daily Show: Extremist Makeover - Homeland Edition

Daily Show: Mosque-Erade

Daily Show: Municipal Land-Use Hearing

Daily Show: Michael Bloomberg

Keith Olbermann: Special Comment: There Is No 'Ground Zero Mosque'

YouTube: "We've Got To Stop The Mosque At Ground Zero"


For further reading:

FactCheck.org: Questions About the 'Ground Zero Mosque'

NYC Mayor's Speech Supporting Park51

Top Religious Leaders Denounce Growing Anti-Muslim Sentiment; Express Support for NY Mosque, Community Center

The New Yorker: Park51, the proposed mosque near Ground Zero

Cracked: 3 Reasons the "Ground Zero Mosque" Debate Makes No Sense

AP: Behind the News: Describing the proposed NYC mosque

The Economist: Build that mosque

The Economist: Sense and sensitivity

Fareed Zakaria: Build the Ground Zero Mosque

Slate: Islam is Ground Zero

NYMag: The imbroglio over the ground-zero mosque

NYTimes: News Corp. Gives Republicans $1 Million

LSAT Prep While Working or in College

If you have a busy schedule with work or school and a halfway-decent social life, it’s difficult enough to manage everything. Add in LSAT prep, and it's easy to feel overwhelmed.

For this reason, start studying for the LSAT earlier than you think you'll need to.

Your elementary school book reports probably took longer than you'd thought they would, due to both procrastination and underestimation of the project's enormity.

Same goes for LSAT prep.

It's a more difficult exam than those you took to get into undergrad, and it has higher stakes.

Because you likely have more to do now than when you were in high school, you really can't afford to procrastinate.

Give yourself extra time to prepare. I recommend a minimum of 3 months, but 4 months wouldn't be a bad idea if you want to give yourself a bit of a cushion.

The busier you are with work or school, the greater the number of months you'll need. This won't necessarily mean you'll be studying for a greater number of hours, of course. It simply means that you'll have to spread out your studying.

This is a good thing. You shouldn't cram your studying all at once anyway. The LSAT is not about memorizing material. Rather, it's about refining your thought processes to think more logically.

The more spread out your studying is, and the greater the number of months that you're thinking about this, the more you'll learn the LSAT mindset of skepticism, analysis, and improve your ability to interpret convoluted text.


The following are just some general suggestions for how and when to study. Of course, you'll have to adjust them for your specific needs, and your actual studying will vary week by week.


If you work full-time or go to school full-time, 15 hours per week of LSAT studying over the course of 4 months might be a good guideline.

Here's how you might fit it in over the course of the week:

-5 hours on Saturday
-2.5 hours per day, Mon-Thurs
-0 hours on Friday
-0 hours on Sunday


If you work part-time or go to school part-time, 20 hours per week of LSAT studying over the course of 3 months might be a good guideline.

Here's how you might fit it in over the course of the week:

-5 hours on Saturday
-3.75 hours per day, Mon-Thurs
-0 hours on Friday
-0 hours on Sunday


If you work full-time, you'll probably have a harder time fitting in your studying because you'll have less unscheduled (free) time.

Here's how you might fit in 2.5 hours on a weekday:

-.5 hours before starting the workday (may require getting to the office early)
-.5 hours during lunch
-1.5 hours



Now, I know 5 hours of LSAT studying is not your ideal way to spend a Saturday. Aside from killing a good chunk of a weekend day, it'll probably tame your Friday nights a bit.

(If it doesn't on the first Friday night you party while prepping, it certainly will on the second. You'll realize that the correlation between Friday night partying and Saturday morning hangovers may, in fact, be of a causal nature as well.)

However, the studying has to happen sometime. Unless you want to fit even more study time into your weekdays, or you want to study on both weekend days, 5 hours of studying will have to happen on one weekend day. (I'm not necessarily saying it's better to load your weekend studying onto one day, just that you may prefer it. Modify as desired.)

So, how do you study 5 hours on a weekend day?

First of all, waking up early is probably the way to go. This gives you the late afternoon/early evening to spend with family or friends.

However, don't study as soon as you get out of bed. It takes your brain up to 2 hours to fully wake up in the morning, so do other stuff before starting your studying for the day.

Here's how you might study for 5 hours on a weekend day:

8AM-10AM: wake up, brush teeth, eat breakfast, shower, exercise, check email/Facebook/news, etc.
10AM-12:30PM: study LSAT
12:30-1:15PM: lunch
1:15-3:45PM: study LSAT
3:45PM-???: fun stuff

Feel free to shift it all 2 hours later if you're on a different sleep schedule. Remember, though, that you're not supposed to party the night before.



If you're in school, you probably have a great deal of unscheduled (free) time, during which you have several things to do at undefined points during the week:

-Facebook
-Friends
-Extracurriculars
-Internship
-Job
-Exercise

Then, of course, there's class, which is at a defined point during the week. That (supposedly) makes you more likely to go each week because you know exactly when it is. It's scheduled in your planner/calendar.

I don't care whether you miss class sometimes. Professors ramble, and you can probably get a good GPA without going too often.

However, I do care whether you study for the LSAT.

If there are specific times each week that you're supposed to study, you're more likely to actually study. At the very least, it may make you feel guilty for doing other stuff during that time.

Guilt is a great motivator.

Since your classes aren't necessarily at the same time each day, the LSAT studying doesn't have to be at the same time every day either.

However, you should still treat it like a class (or two). It might be a good idea to take this into account when planning your classes and other responsibilities during the semester. If the norm at your school is taking 4 or 5 classes a semester, consider taking 3 or 4 classes during your LSAT prep semester instead. Consider not doing an internship that semester. There's a good chance you'll need the time.


Summary:

-Start your prep earlier than you think is necessary.

-Set aside specific times to study each day.

-Try to spread your studying throughout the week.

-Give yourself at least one or two days off from studying per week.

-Try to reduce other obligations during the period that you'll be prepping.

Photo by jackol

LSAT Diaries: LSAT Study, Logic Games, and Laziness

If you want to be in LSAT Diaries, please email me at LSATUnplugged@gmail.com. (You can be in LSAT Diaries whether you've taken the exam already or not.)

Leave Jake some encouragement and advice below in the comments!

Jake's LSAT Diary:

When planning a summer of studying, there are usually two major possibilities: either you stick to your studying out of willpower, or you lose motivation and stop studying. This oddly cool and drizzly summer in Santa Cruz has introduced the third outcome: pain-induced laziness. Four bouts with illness taking out nearly a full month of studying made me think I'd be set back, but bursts of intense studying may have ended up unlocking more ability.

My initially breakneck pace of studying continued after my first LSAT diary, as I knocked out Logic Games, and the gears in my head were clicking. My first PrepTest afterwards resulted in a promising 172, with -3 on Logic Games questions. Whatever excitement I had would be tempered as I was either sick or out of town for the next two weeks straight, resulting in me writing about 11 different revisions of a personal statement. I also got in a few moments reading about Logical Reasoning when in the New Jersey hotel room or in the few hours before Iron Maiden. I was able to fit in a PrepTest while under the weather that resulted in a 168. Of course, I wrote it off to my illness.

Having finished all of the non-PrepTest material, I moved on to start the SuperPrep. At this point Logical Reasoning had become my least predictable area, and I had become scared silly of the SuperPrep logic games after reading horror stories. So when I counted my PrepTest A games score and got a -1, with a 174 total score. I got excited, and had my first "LSAT Zombie" conversation. "DUDE I think I figured out Logic Games! Now I can just hammer out logical reasoning and reading comprehension!" "...what the hell did you just say?"

The next two weeks would be mostly destroyed by an ear infection, followed with a second ear infection in the other ear. Constant ringing and stabbing pains took me out of the moment every time I tried to study, and I'd give up after a question or two. During the two-day gap between each ear's infection, I saddled up for PrepTest B which again had a killer logic game or two supposedly. I could feel that it was difficult, and at the end of that section I had to educated guess three question in the final minute. My minus 1 in the games section, coupled with a -1 on LR and RC, gave me a 180 with a question to spare.

Needless to say, I freaked out a little. I don't know if beer feeds ear infections, but the next ear infection was worse than the last. I didn't care that much, since I just scored a one-bleeping-eighty. I realized when looking over the 180 that there were many things that I do out of habit now that have greatly helped me.

One is something I read and had since forgotten: keep your pencil moving. This is best in regards to Logic Games questions when I feel like I'm missing an inference. I used to freeze and try to think it out, but now I'll do hypotheticals to try and find the inferences, or just the answer if there are none.

Another is to circle any successful hypothetical. I used to not use previous hypotheticals since I would find myself confused as to which one was based on what rules. Of course, that doesn't matter unless it was for a question that eliminated or added a rule. This was one of the best time-saving mechanics that I found for the LG sections.

In regards to logical reasoning, the SuperPrep is probably the best tool I've seen. Being able to see the machinery of the LSAC's decisions are good not only for the questions you missed and had trouble on, but for all of them. There are parts of the argument that you may not consider important, but the LSAC does. Just knowing this language has helped immensely. Also, I naturally make up a small character every time there's a speaker. For example, if there's a "Critic," I imagine a posh british guy smoking a pipe in front of a fireplace making the statement. If it's a "manager," it's a yuppie staring out a skyscraper window. It makes the stimulus more memorable.

Lastly, I realized that I felt completely comfortable in the 35 minute format. I have never taken an untimed PrepTest or an untimed section, so by now I know how much time I have left naturally. Feeling comfortable with the time I have left has cut down on stupid mistakes. I read the question carefully, then use process of elimination on all of the answers. If I don't have the answer yet, I read it carefully again. If it's still not clear, I skip it for later. With this strategy, I usually finish LR sections in under 30 minutes.

While my law school dreaming did take hold for a couple days of arrogance, I decided I would not give weight to any score other than the official LSAT. Still slightly under the weather, I took my first proctored LSAT, earning a 173. From here on it's a grind to October 9, as I hope to become more armored and solid, avoiding stupid mistakes.

Photo by drurydrama

7-Month LSAT Study Guide / Schedule

7 months is more than enough time if you stick with a regular, but moderate, schedule. I've reviewed all books and PrepTests mentioned below in my best LSAT prep books post.

This 28-week schedule is intense. Follow it only if you're studying for the LSAT full-time, or if you're able to study for several hours each weekend. You might have work/school/life obligations that make this impossible. If that's the case, skip some of the "re-do" and "review" weeks, and complete the rest at a more relaxed pace.

Month 1:

Review my relevant articles on Logic Games and complete this list of Logic Games from PrepTests 52-61 ordered by difficulty during the first 4 weeks, untimed.

Week 1: Complete Pure Sequencing, Basic Linear, and Advanced Linear games. Review each game that gives you trouble.

Week 2: Complete Grouping: In-Out / Selection, Grouping: Splitting, and Grouping: Matching games. Review each game that gives you trouble.

Week 3: Complete Combination games.

Week 4: Complete any Logic Games in older exams of the types that give you difficulty. Complete a few timed sections of Logic Games. Review.


Month 2:

Week 5: Read A Rulebook For Arguments and complete a few more timed sections of Logic Games. Review.

Week 6: Review my articles on Logical Reasoning before completing LSAT questions of each type in PrepTests 52-61 using the LSAT Logical Reasoning spreadsheet (untimed). Complete a few timed sections of Logic Games.

Week 7: Continue Logical Reasoning work from Week 6 with additional question-types and complete a few timed sections of Logic Games.

Week 8: Continue Logical Reasoning work from Week 6 with additional question-types and complete a few timed sections of Logic Games.


Month 3:

Week 9: A brief return to Logic Games: Complete any Logic Games in older exams of the types that give you difficulty (untimed), then complete several timed sections of Logic Games. Review. Complete a few timed sections of Logical Reasoning.

Week 10: Complete Logical Reasoning work from Week 6 with additional question-types and complete a few timed sections of Logic Games.

Week 11: Complete several timed sections of Logical Reasoning from PrepTests 19-28. Review. Also complete some timed sections of Logic Games.

Week 12: Read my articles on Reading Comprehension and complete several sections of Reading Comp from PrepTests 52-61 (untimed). Complete a few timed sections of Logic Games, Logical Reasoning, and Reading Comprehension.


Month 4:

Week 13: Complete several timed sections of Reading Comp from older exams. Review. Also complete some timed sections of LG and LR.

Week 14: Catch-up and review week. Re-do the Linear / Sequencing games from PrepTests 52-61. Try to solve them more quickly and make new inferences. Complete timed sections of all types.

Week 15: A brief return to Logical Reasoning: Complete any Logical Reasoning questions in older exams of the types that give you difficulty (untimed), then complete several timed sections of Logical Reasoning. Review. Complete timed sections of all types.

Week 16: Catch-up and review week. Re-do the Grouping and Combination games from PrepTests 52-61. Try to solve them more quickly and make new inferences. Complete timed sections of all types.


Month 5:

Week 17: Catch-up and review week. Re-do the Logical Reasoning questions from PrepTests 52-61 that gave you trouble. Complete timed sections of all types.

Week 18: Complete the 3 tests in LSAC's SuperPrep (timed) and review the explanations. Although the explanations are technical, it's good to learn how the test-makers think. Identify weak areas.

Week 19: Re-read my articles on Logic Games, Logical Reasoning, and Reading Comprehension about question-types still giving you trouble.

Week 20: Use my Logic Games categorization to do question-types in older exams that still give you difficulty. Review. Complete some timed sections of LR and RC.


Month 6:

Week 21: Use the Logical Reasoning spreadsheet to do question-types in older exams that still give you difficulty. Review. Complete some timed sections of LG and RC.

Week 22: Do Reading Comp passages about your least-favorite topics in older exams using my Reading Comp passages categorization. Complete a recent LSAT PrepTest under timed conditions. Review.

Week 23: Complete a few timed sections of Logic Games, Logical Reasoning, and Reading Comp, and review. Complete a recent LSAT PrepTest under timed conditions. Review.

Week 24: For the remaining weeks, use these free Logic Games Explanations, these video explanations, and these other LSAT explanations after completing the relevant exam.

Complete 3 recent LSAT PrepTests under timed conditions as 4-section exams. Review each exam on alternating days.

Month 7:

Week 25: Complete 3 recent LSAT PrepTests (timed). Splice in sections from another to simulate experimental sections. Review each exam on alternating days.

Week 26: Complete 3 recent LSAT PrepTests (timed). Splice in sections from another to simulate experimental sections. Consider using one section to create a 6-section exam for extra practice. Review each exam on alternating days.

Week 27: Complete 3 recent LSAT PrepTests (timed). Splice in sections from another to simulate experimental sections. (Again, consider using one section to create a 6-section exam). Review each exam on alternating days.

Week 28:  Complete 3 recent LSAT PrepTests (timed). Splice in sections from another to simulate experimental sections. (Again, consider using one section to create a 6-section exam). Review each exam on alternating days. More thoughts on how to simulate the experimental section in this article.

***

Also check out my other sample LSAT study schedules and plans.

LSAT Diaries: The 22-Year-Old Repentant Slacker

If you want to be in LSAT Diaries, please email me at LSATUnplugged@gmail.com. (You can be in LSAT Diaries whether you've taken the exam already or not.)

Leave Jake some encouragement and advice below in the comments!

Jake's LSAT Diary:

I write you from beautiful Santa Cruz, California, a city built equally on surfing, liberal activism and weed. Having just graduated from UC Santa Cruz with a History degree, I found my job prospects in history to be what one might expect: either get more education, or put boxes into other boxes for a living. While this provides some good stimulation to seek more education, that is not why I am trying to go to law school.

Both of my parents were court reporters, and both of them complained about lawyers endlessly. "They're just so darn sure of themselves," my Mom would say. Despite this, they did have lawyer friends. My Dad would sometimes "ask" me to proofread some of his transcripts, largely to make me get off my ass and work, and I enjoyed reading these transcripts enough to be terrible at it. Psychology majors need not inform me that this entire law school thing is just an attempt at rebellion/acceptance, as I've already considered that and agree.

Here comes the confession: I have always, until recently, been a slacker. Not the traditional slacker, but rather someone who only does what is necessary to get by without making waves, with no attempts at excellence. I went to a community college to start and transferred to UC Santa Cruz, and in all my classes I completed all of the assigned reading in exactly one class, and completed none of it in more than half. I never failed to turn in an assignment, but I'd often turn in my first draft of a paper that I had banged out in a short afternoon's work. To say memorization and recitation is not my forte would be an understatement. Yet still my grades were decent enough (3.3 at community college, 3.47 at UCSC).

It wasn't until I took my senior exit survey on Hitler and Stalin that I realized what I was missing. In this class, a hilarious and incredibly wise professor led a 18-person class in what was essentially a confrontational book club. We all read at least 10 books and wrote at least 70 pages (one book per week + books for 20 page research paper). Everyone was impassioned and had come up with their own conclusions on the books, and for our last meeting we got together at a student's house and drank while talking about our individual research projects. In the next, last quarter, I got the best grades I have ever gotten. I was later told that the class sounded a lot like law school, and that's when my research began. And now, here I am.

My studying habits revolve around my job: I have a 9-5 type job, and as I said earlier, I put boxes into other boxes. Luckily there's only about four hours of boxing to do, so I have the other four hours to research law schools and get all my transcript/letter of recommendation/personal statement business done. Unfortunately, that work ran out quick, so now I've resorted to acting like a kid looking through a car magazine, except the cars in this magazine are law schools. "Ohh that looks cool. Too bad it's in New Jersey. Oh, that school looks cool. UGH I WISH I could afford that one." Etc. My GPA isn't great but it's good enough: getting into a top 20 school will require a great LSAT score, but it's at least achievable. I'm setting my sights at getting a solid chance at Boston College and Minnesota, even though I'd still be happy going to a University like St. Thomas in Minneapolis.

These are high hopes, but I am also a great test -taker. I started my LSAT studying two weeks ago when I ran into one of my UCSC professors on the bus downtown (he is also now writing me a letter of recommendation). He had with him a friend who was in law school, and since then I have been a law school freak. I took my first practice LSAT that day (the only one i have done untimed), not knowing what to expect. I scored 20 on the first section, which was reading comprehension. Second section had the games, and I scored a fantastic 4/24, which is slightly worse than if I had guessed. I didn't even total up my final score from my test, afraid of the answer.

After working through Logic Games, I took their practice test a week and a half ago and got a 157, getting 13 right on the games portion. This is and probably will always be my weakest portion, because one bad game will knock off good chunk of my score. My main problems surrounding logic games are my inability to make connections between the clues and the diagram, and the tendency to misread some clues. The questions around text and arguments somehow just make sense to me, probably because of my extensive experience arguing. "What can be inferred from your argument, Mom, is that you think my respect for you is proportional to the amount of time we spend together."

The problem with LSAT study plans is that they are built to get you to study. What I need is something to get me to stop studying. Last week I constantly had a book in my hands, something my roommates have come to hate. The only good studying space is the living room, where my roommate comes to break up my study sessions by playing death metal at full volume. I can say with confidence that when LSAT day comes, I will not be fazed by a student tapping their pencil.

Since that first scored and timed test, I've been doing Logic Games (and redoing them). I took my first "Actual Official" LSAT PrepTest yesterday, one from 1995 (yes, I wish I had found this blog before I bought my LSAT books). When I tallied my score from test 14, I knew I had done well, but I wasn't expecting the whopping 168/169 (my raw score split the two) to be staring back at me. I had gotten lucky, with four easy games on which I missed only one. Yet it also proved it's a possible score. If only I had been 22 in 1995. Don't worry, Steve, I'm getting the LSAT books you recommended.

If there's one thing I'm worried about more the LSAT games, it's my own willpower. I have been looking at LSAT and law related stuff for 4+ hours per day, every day, for two weeks. I say now that I will not stop until I master games, and master the LSAT. Yet I know I'm the type to burn out quickly. I only wish I could fall asleep on an LSAT book and wake up in October knowing everything. But I guess I wouldn't get to do the fascinating work of putting boxes in other boxes.

LSAT Prep: Logical Reasoning Tips

This LSAT Blog post lists all the Logical Reasoning-related blog posts you should read toward the beginning of your prep.

I've listed them in the specific order in which you should read them, along with a link to the categorization of Logical Reasoning questions you should complete from the Actual, Official LSAT PrepTests.

Here are complete explanations for Logical Reasoning questions in those PrepTests.

This is all meant to accompany the initial Logical Reasoning portion of my LSAT study schedules, in order to give you more specific guidance on when to read each Logical Reasoning blog post.

Enjoy!

Topics
Get a sense of what sorts of topics are covered in LSAT Logical Reasoning:
15 Common LSAT Logical Reasoning Topics

(And just for fun...25 Future LSAT Logical Reasoning Topics)


Before, or during, your LSAT Logical Reasoning prep:
Real Life Logic Examples


Vocabulary
Improve your vocabulary and understanding of words used in the Logical Reasoning section:
LSAT Logical Reasoning Vocabulary Words

LSAT Words: "Except" "unless" "until" and "without" mean...

LSAT Numbers: All, Most, Several, Many, Some, None


Sufficient and Necessary Conditions
Learn the difference between them:
Words Indicating Sufficient / Necessary Conditions, and Time

LSAT Logic | Necessary vs Sufficient Conditions

Logical Reasoning: Necessary and Sufficient Conditions


Formal vs. Informal Logic
Get a sense of the difference between formal and informal logic:
Formal vs. Informal Logic in Logical Reasoning


LR Categorization by PrepTest
Use the following spreadsheet (and/or list at the end of that blog post) to identify questions of various types:
LSAT Logical Reasoning Spreadsheet


LR Question Types
Before completing Must Be True Questions:
Logical Reasoning | Formal Logic Inference Questions

Logical Reasoning: Inference Questions and the Contrapositive


Before completing Most Strongly Supported Questions:
Most Strongly Supported Logical Reasoning Questions


Before completing Necessary Assumption Questions:
Necessary Assumption Questions, Negation Test, and Must Be True Qs

Difference Between Necessary & Sufficient Assumption Questions

Arguments and Contrapositives | Necessary and Sufficient Assumptions


Before completing Sufficient Assumption Questions:
Logical Reasoning | Sufficient Assumption (Justify) Questions

Sufficient Assumption Questions | Tips and Categorization

Sufficient Assumption Questions and the Negation Test


Before completing Strengthen Questions:
5 Steps to Solving Strengthen Logical Reasoning Questions


Before completing Weaken Questions:
5 Steps to Solving Weaken Logical Reasoning Questions


Before completing Parallel Reasoning / Parallel Flaw Questions:
Logical Reasoning: Parallel and Parallel Flaw Questions



After learning about the various question-types:

LSAT Logical Reasoning Question Types: A New Approach

Necessary Assumption Question: The Rattlesnake Folktale

Negating Conditional Statements in Logical Reasoning




Miscellaneous (Simple):

7 Logical Reasoning Tips and Tricks

How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love LSAT Logical Reasoning

How to Ace LSAT Logical Reasoning | 7 Habits

Conditional Reasoning: Contrapositive, Mistaken Reversal, Mistaken Negation

The Logic of Real Arguments by Alec Fisher | Excerpt


Miscellaneous (Complex):

LSAT Logic: Neither Necessary Nor Sufficient

LSAT Logical Reasoning Flaw Questions with the Same Argument

2 Tough LSAT Logical Reasoning Flaw Questions

5 Hardest LSAT Logical Reasoning Questions, Explained

Sample LSAT Logical Reasoning Questions

Photo by telstar

LSAT Diary: Strategies and Tips to Ace the LSAT from 179-Scorer

This installment of LSAT Diaries comes from Brad, who followed my 3-month LSAT study schedule and scored a 179!

He's got tons of LSAT advice for you about how he did it.

If you want to be in LSAT Diaries, please email me at LSATUnplugged@gmail.com. (You can be in LSAT Diaries whether you've taken the exam already or not.)

Thanks to Brad for sharing his experience and advice, and please leave your questions for him below in the comments!

Brad's LSAT Diary:

By the time I had made the decision to apply to law school, I realized that I had a bit of an uphill battle. My first year in college was horrendous, and had a large impact on my GPA. The following 3.5 years were much better and I graduated with a major GPA of 3.6, but a cumulative of 3.16. With a desire to attend a T14 school, I knew that the LSAT would be an incredibly important part of my application, and would possibly make or break my admission. I decided to devote myself entirely to the LSAT. When the results came in, I knew that I had made the right decision.

With that, my first words of wisdom to anyone reading this is to sit down, think long and hard about this test, and make the decision. If you are just starting to kick around the idea of taking the test, and the next administration is in 2 months, I would advise holding out a few more months. If you are set on taking the next administration, know what grit and commitment it requires. This test may in the long run have the largest effect on your future of any test in your life.

The test is not unbeatable, but you have to show a total commitment to beating it. I recently ran into an old acquaintance who told me that he had also taken the LSAT, but shortly before the test started seeing a new lady friend, and thus didn't devote any time to studying logic games. As you can imagine, he was not quite happy with his score.

I originally planned on taking the test in Feb. of 2010, but due to outside circumstances, work, etc. was not comfortable with the amount of studying I had achieved and put it off until June. I did some intermittent studying in the months leading up to and shortly thereafter Feb. but with about three months until the June administration, cleared everything that I could from my schedule and made the LSAT my number one priority. I felt lost, and a bit overwhelmed. I was doing early LSAT PrepTests, but my scores were erratic.

I stumbled across LSAT Blog, read through absolutely everything on the site that I could, and decided that his three month study plan was the best for me. Of all of the information that I found on various blogs and message boards, nothing seemed as comprehensive and structured as Steve's LSAT study plans. I cleared off my large desk calendar and wrote down everything that I needed to do, day by day, over the 3 months. I was about a week and a half behind when I got started, so the day by day breakdown allowed me to condense Steve's schedule a bit, and stay on track. Having a day by day guide kept my studying structured, and forced me to face when I was falling behind, and catch up.

Remember, the point of the study strategies, and of the studying in general is to find something that works for you. By the time you enter the testing center, you should recognize patterns, know there will almost undoubtedly be a question about unemployment rates, and have a good idea as to exactly what 35 minutes feels like. For those three months, I lived and breathed the LSAT.

One of the most important aspects of my studying was pinning down the variations of my mental state during each PrepTest. I'll write a bit more about state of mind when talking about test day, but for the prep work, I cannot stress its importance. I understand that everyone has to study when they can and how they can, but try to make the environment as realistic as possible. That means turning off the tv and the stereo, getting off the couch, and pretending every time that you put pencil to paper, that you are taking a test. I took my comfortable office chair out of the office, and used a kitchen chair.

When I was studying, I didn't smoke, didn't eat, didn't listen to music and turned off my phone. When doing a PrepTest, I used the online LSAT timer so that come test day I wouldn't be surprised to hear someone interrupt my train of thought by saying "5 minutes remaining in this section." (Sounds silly, I know, but the first time I used it I nearly jumped out of my chair I was so thrown off by a sudden interruption.)

On my two days off a week, after my morning routine, I would take a full PrepTest. I began adding on a fifth, and for endurance occasionally a sixth section. I would then take an afternoon break, and return to dissect the test. I began with writing down each problem that I answered wrong, and what type of problem it was so that I knew my weak spots. I would then go through any question that I answered wrong and any question that I answered correctly but had trouble with. For every question that I answered incorrectly I would dissect the question and explain why the right answer was right and the others not. It was through this very time consuming process that I noticed the greatest jump in my score. When I truly understood why a question was wrong, I would be much less likely to repeat a mistake.

My scores consistently hovered around 176 with two important happenings. At first, I realized I was dissecting the questions to an almost absurd degree while testing, so I needed to take a step back, and trust my gut a bit. The other was that the title of one of Steve's posts became my mantra of sorts. "How I learned to stop worrying and love the LSAT." I was at my absolute best when I viewed the test not as a source of frustration, but a puzzle, a code to crack, or a game. I cannot guess how many times I repeated those words to myself.

When I signed up for the testing center, being in a major city, I had my choice between a number of locations. I picked the most expensive private university in the list and am very happy I did. I ended up in a law classroom at Northwestern, a top 14 school with very comfortable amenities, as opposed to my undergrad school which was notorious for terrible classrooms with odd smells, awful florescent lighting, and a number of confusing noises.

So finally, leading up to test day, I took the two days before the test off of work to focus, and most importantly to relax. I did activities during the day that were not test-related, and wouldn't tire me out, ensuring a good night's sleep. I woke up the morning of the test, with my ziplock bag already packed, went through my normal morning routine, and headed out the door. I arrived at the testing center over an hour early, just to ensure that time would not add to my already existing nerves. I brought with me 1 Logic Game, 1 Reading Comp passage, and two pages of Logical Reasoning.

I found a secluded spot, and sat down to relax, calm my nerves, and do a few prep questions. I did not score my questions that morning, as I didn't need to shake my confidence with a few wrong answers immediately before heading into the test. One of the other important mental games was also mentioned by Danielle in her LSAT Diary. I ignored that other people were there to take the test, I didn't need to feel someone else's nerves, or let their casual attitude make me feel unprepared for being so nervous. Make the test about you, and simply focus on you and the test.

Seeing as people seem to be drawn to sports analogies in things like this, what's one more? I remembered watching basketball as a kid, specifically Reggie Miller at the free throw line, and was amazed that someone could be so intently focused with 35,000 screaming fans and millions more watching around the country. In taking the test, I tried to achieve a similar state of zen if you will. When I sat down at the table, I knew that I had done everything I could to prepare. Early mornings, late nights, 8-10 hour days of studying and test taking left me knowing every corner of that exam. When the time came, and the proctor told us to open our books, much like I imagine Reggie Miller did, I stopped thinking about the test, took a deep breath, and simply started to do the test.

Without the full support of my family, friends, and girlfriend, I would not have been able to achieve what I have. They simply had to understand that for three months, barring important obligations, I was off the grid. If that meant that on our one day off together, my girlfriend knew that I would disappear to the office for the majority of the day, that was the sacrifice I had to make, and luckily the sacrifice she was willing to make. It was a rough three months indeed, but I can say without a shred of doubt, absolutely worth it. I jumped 12 points from my first cold test to test day, and hopefully anyone reading this will realize that with the right preparation and resources, a few months of dedication can make a world of difference.

LSAT Logic: Analysis of Online Dating

LSAT Blog reader Jacqueline wrote the following LSAT-style analysis of a real-world situation.

She analyzed a Wall Street Journal article titled, Marriage-Maker Claims Are Tied in Knots.

Jacqueline's analysis:

Argument Analysis and Summary

* Claims that online dating leads to marriage for many Americans is disputed.

* Ex: eHarmony (2% of Americans married last year met on eHarmony), Match.com (12 marriages a day), Plenty of Fish (100,000~ marriages a year).

* Claims derived from unrepresentative surveys (online survey, “some survey”)

* Attention from marriage researchers because it claims to be more successful than traditional methods.

* Not all online dating websites are offering marriage statistics.

* Fewer than 2% of Americans marry each year

* Pew survey did not specify in its survey how many were marriages


Argument of online dating websites

* Online dating websites accurately individually claim that their services tend to end in marriages for their members.


How can we weaken this argument?

* Fewer than 2% of Americans use the internet (ha!)

* Businessowners of online dating websites have a history of reporting false statistics to attract paying members and are likely to continue.

* Individuals in marriages that report that they first met online cannot remember which online dating service they used, if at all.

* Owners of online dating websites pay individuals who meet online to marry and divorce several times a year and be counted for each time.

* Plenty of Fish has never had more than 100,000 members in a year and a person can only marry once in a year.

* Surveys conducted by and for these online dating websites only consist of their highest paying members who have more access to personal services.

* Individuals that are engaged and met online consider themselves to be “married” and answer as such when asked, even though this may not be official or listed in government registries.


How can we strengthen this argument?

* A new survey conducted by Gallup that is within 1% of error showed that over 50% of relationship that end in marriages started online.

* For those in a relationship and end in marriage who spend a significant amount of time communicating online, especially those in long-distance relationships, consider their relationship to have started online even if it did not.

* The statistic “fewer than 2% of Americans marry each year” is significantly outdated and higher in reality.

* A significant amount of people who met online on these dating websites and married are reluctant and fail to tell surveyors that they found their partners online.

* Released marriage statistics only survey heterosexual marriages, whereas online dating websites consider their members who become “life partners” to be the same as marriage.


What information would be helpful in evaluating the argument?

* What is the total amount of marriages, as defined by surveyors (heterosexual), of which the partners meet online?

* Are these individuals members of multiple sites? If so, do they attribute their success to one or all sites?

* Do non-heterosexual life partners count as marriages?

Photo by 23905174@N00 / CC BY 2.0

LSAT Prep Tips Recommendations Diary

This installment of LSAT Diaries comes from J, a 39-year-old dad. He studied, took the LSAT in December 2009, and got a 157. J thought he could do better, studied again, and got a 166 in February 2010.

He's got tons of LSAT advice for you about how he did it.

If you want to be in LSAT Diaries, please email me at LSATUnplugged@gmail.com. (You can be in LSAT Diaries whether you've taken the exam already or not.)

Leave your questions for J below in the comments!

J's LSAT Diary:

Steve was flat-out wrong. In several blog posts, he alluded to his “belief” that studying for the LSAT should be an exercise that lasts for three months at a minimum. But that’s just what the average person should expect. I had always excelled at standardized tests, so his advice didn’t apply to someone like me. It was clear to me that I could sufficiently prepare in just over six weeks, and I was going to smoke that test.

And this, ladies and gentlemen, was the first major mistake I made during my LSAT prep, and the basis for my very first recommendation to you: prepare for this test for at least three months, and as diligently as your schedule will allow. And stick with me through my “diary,” because I’m writing this for the sole purpose of providing pointers that I offer as a result of already having gone through the process of studying for this exam. I will try to be direct and succinct.

The background: I am 39, married with two young children, and decided about a year ago to go to law school after playing around with the idea for the better part of a decade. Because of my family status and my unwillingness to uproot my wife and kids from our home, I was basically limited to applying to two schools: one being a Top 50 program, and one being a strong, upwardly mobile regional program ranked just out of the Top 100. I took the LSAT twice—in December 2009, I scored 157. After receiving my score in late December, I hit the LSAT prep books again, and scored 166 in February 2010, which not only helped earn me admission to both schools, but scholarship offers from each as well. Yes, the hard work during prep can and will pay off for you if you devote yourself to it.

So back to my mistakes, and my recommendations for you…

First, the issue of how long to study. Given the disparity between my two scores, it should be apparent to you that I was not sufficiently prepared the first time I took the LSAT. I thought that I was—but I was very wrong about that. Again, Steve recommends three months as a minimum. If you’re serious about scoring well though, and you’re the sort of person who is willing to take a methodical approach to this, I would suggest four to five months. Because you can get better the more that you read, the more that you practice, the more that you drill under timed conditions.

The more time that you give yourself, the more able you will be to identify your personal weaknesses, and to take measures to strengthen your approach in these areas. Think about how many people have gotten their results back and thought to themselves, “Geez, what I would give for just two or three more points so that I could get into so-and-so law school…” But it’s too late for them to “give something” to get those points. It’s not too late for you though, and all you have to give is your time and focus. Those extra points will be yours.

Timed practice tests: it is absolutely crucial that you mimic the actual testing conditions as much as you possibly can! When you complete a section of a practice test, don’t stand up to stretch or go to the bathroom; don’t check your Facebook account for notifications or go to the fridge to open a soda. Reset your timer, turn the damn page, and start the next section! It’s not fun, but you can be sure that it will be what is required of you on test day, so you might as well get used to it now.

The time of the day is very important as well! I have never been a morning person, and I initially took my practice exams in the afternoons. After my initial score, I changed my strategy, waking daily around 6:00 am and beginning my studying between 8:00 and 9:00, and I took all practice tests around that time from then on. When your mind is geared to perform at that level at that time of the day, it makes a big difference. (See Steve’s blog post for more on the dangers of sleep inertia).

Speaking of the transition from section to section, do not dwell on the fact that you might have had to fill in a couple of “guess” answers at the end of the previous section. Clear your mind and focus on the new task at hand—otherwise, your lack of focus will later lead you to having to fill in guess bubbles at the end of the new section as well. This is a planned trap by the test makers that you must avoid. Don’t let them do you in!

And again regarding practice tests, do as many of them under timed conditions as you can. But the real key to benefiting from them is to review every single question that you got wrong until you understand exactly why you got it wrong. Failure to do this will likely result in you making the same sort of mistake on similarly structured questions in the future. Review, review, review!

Do not allow yourself to get caught up in the content of a stimulus. Focus solely on the structure. As tempting as it is to picture outraged French people rioting because some artist displayed a new, controversial work of art (Mon Dieu!), such mental images will suck valuable seconds away from you that could be better used later in the section. Save the visualizations for after the exam—you’ll have more time to chuckle about them then anyway.

Necessary versus sufficient conditions. The difference between these is something that you absolutely, positively have to understand, for this exam will test you time and again on your ability to discern between the two. Hopefully, you will reach a point in your studies when you will suddenly reach an epiphany about how the two interact with one another, and about how the psychometricians try to test your understanding of the relationship between the two. Read what you can about it, and you should definitely take the time to memorize the lists of necessary and sufficient condition indicator words. I wrote the two lists down on an index card and carried it around with me for two days, periodically attempting to mentally recite the list. You will benefit from it if you do the same.

Some day, you might be tangled up with some nasty stimulus that is designed to sink the vast majority of test takers. But if you can quickly identify an indicator word, the structure of the stimulus will become transparent, and you can move quickly through the question. And don't forget that they will often try to see if you are prone to confusing necessary and sufficient conditions. Know the difference well enough to avoid this classic trap. See Steve’s blog post about necessary versus sufficient conditions.

Here are a few pointers about books:

* Logic Games Bible—read Chapter 2, and then re-read it before moving on. At the end of the chapter, the authors “strongly urge” the reader to do just this. Guess who initially ignored their advice? I got a lot more out of the chapter when I read it again during my prep for a re-test. I know that you’re antsy to get through the book and get started on taking PrepTests, but it’s definitely worth the time to do it.


* Reading Comprehension Bible. I hate reading comp. Or at least I did. It was my weakest part of the test, and I loathed the idea of even trying to prep for it. Rather, I focused on the other areas. The result was a big, fat -11 on the December exam. Being out of school for so long, I wasn’t used to using the sort of critical reading skills that the exam seeks to measure, and my speed was lacking. I ordered a copy of the RC Bible and spent the better part of a week reading it, and I’m glad that I did, because it gave me direction on what to look for to determine the author’s tone, and discussed certain trends that have repeated themselves through the tests. By the time I took my second exam, I was consistently scoring in the -4 to -5 range, and more important, I was finishing (or nearly finishing) the section in the allotted time, something that I wasn’t able to do before—and this was a confidence booster. This book is probably not for everyone, but if you are scoring more than five or six wrong on a section during prep tests, it might be worth a look. I can confidently say that this book increased my raw score by two to three points at minimum.

Pointer: I completely agree with Steve’s feeling that you shouldn’t allow yourself to get too bogged down in the typical LSAT Bible pattern of over-classifying everything. They tend to go too far, and it’s not like it will really help you to start classifying types of RC passages.



* Kaplan Advanced. I ordered this book from Amazon before becoming familiar with Steve’s blog. When I asked him what he thought of it, he wrote that I should give it to my worst enemy. Given that I had plenty of other material to learn from anyway, it sat on my bookshelf until my February exam was postponed due to snow. By then, I was out of prep tests, and didn’t know what else to do. I began going through the Kaplan Advanced book for more practice, and I will tell you that I feel that the book has some value as far as LR goes, for it offers a collection of really tough LR questions for you to practice on—the sort that you tend to find in questions numbered 15 to 23 on the exam, though the explanations for the questions are often lacking in substance.

It offers much less value for logic games, for the games tend to be outdated. Sure, they’re good to do from a brain exercise perspective, but the more recent game types (the sort that you’re far more likely to see when you take the exam) are not well represented. But what really pissed me off about this book is that as smart as these authors purport themselves to be, in all of their smugness, they failed to adequately proofread their own work. Sometimes, they offer a stimulus and answer choices, and then in the discussion section for the correct answer, they offer an explanation that belongs to an entirely different stimulus. I was particularly angered at one point because I spent roughly 20 minutes trying to understand their explanation for why a certain answer was correct before realizing that they had actually chosen the wrong answer. What a bunch of clowns. I didn’t have the time to waste on something like this, and I’m assuming that you don’t either.



Warning: unsolicited testimonial
Help from Steve: I enlisted Steve’s tutoring services via telephone. I was already in a position where I could ace many games, but certain types would give me trouble. I went into my sessions with him with a list of games that had especially given me trouble.

What Steve helped me to do was to sharpen my skills so that I could slash right through many games (many in only 5-6 minutes), giving me the extra time I would need in the case of an especially ugly game (Dinosaurs, for instance) might appear. He also taught me how to quickly identify the limited placement options that are essential to cracking certain tough games, and also how to know when creating full templates of possibilities is your best bet (a great example of this is PT 59, Game 4).

It’s probably hard for you to imagine how a tutoring session via telephone would be feasible (before trying it, I certainly did), but it works very well. And the time I spent working with Steve sharpen my skills was well worth the investment: when I approached my fourth game on the February test, I had 18 minutes remaining to complete it.

If nothing else, be sure to learn some of his approaches to various games, in particular those involving limited placement games (dinosaurs), Grouping: In and Out games (birds in the forest), and Sequencing. I feel strongly that his techniques in these areas are far superior to those offered by the prep books.

By the end of my prep, I had done enough LR questions that I felt as though I knew what was coming—where they would try to set you up, and how to sidestep it. I got to the point that I sometimes didn’t even need to read each of the answers—I could pre-phrase after reading the stimulus and go straight to the correct answer, thereby conserving valuable time for the tougher questions later in the section (though I don’t necessarily recommend this approach UNLESS you have spent considerable amounts of time drilling).

I told Steve that I sort of felt like the Keanu Reeves' character “Neo” in The Matrix—that I could see “the code” and react accordingly (interestingly, Steve told me that he uses that analogy with his students as well). Why dodge the bullets coming at you when you can just raise your hand up to them and cause them to fall harmlessly to the floor?


For Test Day:

Be prepared! If at all possible, visit the test center a day or two before the exam. I did, and what I found was a lecture hall with cramped tray desks and somewhat poor lighting. But I also noticed that there were a few larger desks located in the back of the hall, adjacent to some windows that provided natural light. While checking in, I explained to one of the proctors that my back wasn’t all that great (remember, I’m 39…) and asked if I could sit in one of the larger desks (she allowed me to do so). If nothing else, a visit to the testing room will likely keep you from having to deal with any curveballs on test day that might get you rattled.

Finally, learn to love the LSAT. Yes, I’m serious. When I first read Steve’s posts about loving this exam, I concluded that he must really be deranged. But what I found is that the more you drill, the more you understand the setup and the more that you can come to admire it. There were some questions that I got wrong during practices that after examining again, I would think to myself, “Wow, what a really cool question…” And while I thought that he was deranged, I find myself a few months later still receiving his weekly blog post email and looking through it—I suppose I’ve become a deranged Steve Schwartz disciple myself.

I hope at least some of you find this to be helpful, and I wish all of you luck in your efforts. Bust it up!

Photo by bdorfman

2 Tough LSAT Logical Reasoning Flaw Questions

This article was inspired by a discussion with one of my LSAT students. We were discussing the flawed reasoning in a particular Logical Reasoning question. That question's flaw reminded me of a very similar flaw in another LSAT question.

My student was kind enough to find the other question for me, so I'm placing the two side-by-side in this blog post.

This flaw is much less common on the LSAT than the typical necessary/sufficient or correlation/causation confusion. However, familiarizing yourself with it now will make it easier to recognize if you end up seeing it on your exam.

It's the flaw of confusing a false positive with a false negative.


Example #1:

PrepTest 11 (June 1994), Section 2, Question 15 (p125 in 10 Actual)

The question deals with computer security and whether the system grants access to the wrong people.

Evidence: The computer has never committed a false positive determination. In other words, it never allowed the wrong people to access the computer system.

Conclusion: Therefore, it will probably allow the right people, and only the right people, access to the computer system. In other words, the computer system will probably never commit a false negative determination, either.

This argument is flawed. Based on the evidence, it's possible the computer system could simply be super-sensitive and not grant access to anyone. At least, it's possible that the computer system may fail to grant access to many of the right people.


Example #2:

PrepTest 45, Section 1, Question 24

The question deals with DNA tests, criminal proceedings, and exonerations of suspects.

Evidence: DNA tests often confuse two different people's DNA samples as being from the same person. In other words, a particular DNA sample might not actually match DNA taken from a crime scene, but this test will falsely confirm that the two are a match.

Conclusion: Therefore, we should not trust the DNA test when it says that a suspect's DNA does not match DNA taken from a crime scene.

This argument is flawed. The evidence tells us that the test confuses different DNA samples and wrongly leads to convictions. In other words, we know it makes false positive determinations, making innocent people appear guilty.

However, this doesn't mean the test mistakenly tells us that DNA samples do not match those from a crime scene (which would wrongly prevent convictions). In other words, the evidence does not give us reason to believe the DNA test makes false negative determinations, which would make guilty people appear innocent.

Photo by ynse / CC BY-SA 2.0

Free LSAT Prep iPhone App

UPDATE: This is no longer available as an iPhone app.

However, you can still get the free mp3 version.

***

LSAT Blog reader Ryan has now turned his free LSAT Proctor mp3 into a free LSAT Prep iPhone app.

He writes:

It features all five sections for the LSAT with vocal prompts for “Start, 5-Minutes, and Stop.” It also contains a break in the appropriate placement as well. The app has built in distractions to help you acclimate your studies to potential testing day conditions. If you are already confident in your abilities to tune out distractions and what to focus on timing conditions, the distractions can be turned off in the settings menu...

Unlike the MCAT, the LSAT is a written test and does not allow any type of noise-canceling headphones; therefore, the LSAT can often be a cacophony of pencil scratches, sneezes, coughs, weather/animal noises, chair creeks and paper crumbles. Practicing with the LSAT Proctor app will help to numb you to these distractions allowing you to focus on the test at hand. The app utilizes a series of randomized sounds to ensure that you do not become accustomed to the particular distractions; the randomization ensures that you will learn to conquer whatever distractions come your way and not just a particular series of distractions.

If you find that timing is not your problem, but you still are having trouble concentrating with noises, use the app's "Unlimited Noise" settings to disregard vocal prompts and timing conditions to focus on conquering the LSAT under any condition!

Everyone, please thank Ryan for his generosity in sharing this for free!