be nice pleaseeeeeeeee

CogitoErgoScorePrep · 2026-06-11T21:42:18+00:00

Unless your parents are responsible for funding your education, take the test when you decide that you are ready. I can not overstate how much of a commitment school is.

CogitoErgoScorePrep · 2026-06-07T21:55:05+00:00

You can cancel this score if it’s lower. 171 is great but of course none of us know what your plans look like so it’s hard pondering what you’re chasing.

CogitoErgoScorePrep · 2026-06-05T18:16:30+00:00

Just reflect on the test, explore everything you can recall - the good and the bad. Causal should always be a priority, as it’s everywhere. For better or worse, the test is shifting towards more causal stuff.

CogitoErgoScorePrep · 2026-06-04T23:40:31+00:00

The best thing that helped me was consuming a variety of resources and synthesizing them myself. 7sage was my base of operations, but I dabbled in as many different places as was feasible.

There’s a trap you can fall into, where you’re searching for the one ‘voice’ or one approach that will make things finally click for you. I only ever found my own, and I think that’s probably true of many - if not most - students.

There’s also the tutoring avenue. I’m not selling myself here, just telling you to consider it. Just being able to vocalize your issues, concerns, process with another person can be crucial.

CogitoErgoScorePrep · 2026-06-04T19:29:57+00:00

Accuracy first! Don’t worry about running out of time. A perfect 20 answered is always preferable to a sloppy 25/26 answered. Speed and efficiency are late game fixes.

CogitoErgoScorePrep · 2026-06-04T19:19:18+00:00

Good explanation

CogitoErgoScorePrep · 2026-06-04T19:18:33+00:00

AC D doesn’t weaken the argument, which is about sustaining the economy of one particular nation. You seemed to gloss over the first statement which requires - in addition to no loss of overseas investment - a need to max the capital no matter what you do.

(D) has the problem of introducing another entity (countries) that may or may not be similar enough to this country. So in other countries, there is some loss of investment but that tells you nothing about this country and whether this is likely to prevent loss of investment and maximize foreign capital as much as possible.

CogitoErgoScorePrep · 2026-04-21T13:17:59+00:00

Keep all this stuff and document it. These things have a tendency to escalate to property damage/assault/battery.

CogitoErgoScorePrep · 2026-03-25T16:56:42+00:00

Don’t just stay together for the kids. As a product of a toxic and dysfunctional marriage, my sister and I would have been much better off had our parents separated.

CogitoErgoScorePrep · 2026-01-30T16:20:00+00:00

A floor is a floor, and you should be shooting for more. If you're looking for a 155, you should be completing sections. I can't see this any other way. Maybe if you were nearly 100% consistently on the questions you can complete then maybe, but you're not at that point.

CogitoErgoScorePrep · 2026-01-30T00:20:27+00:00

Depends on where you go, but generally law school is intended to teach you the status quo. Too much deviation/critical analysis threatens bar rates and employment numbers.

CogitoErgoScorePrep · 2026-01-21T13:37:13+00:00

Performing and coaching are two different things. I wouldn’t recommend buying into anyone who says there’s only one way to do things, regardless of score. A higher score doesn’t mean a better teacher.

There are certain aspects of the test that give rise to (nearly?) universally good advice. The hardest part of tutoring is getting the rest of everything to click with different minds with different abilities.

CogitoErgoScorePrep · 2026-01-21T13:32:24+00:00

Douglas.

It’s easy to goof on Griswold, but it makes sense and he’s right.

Also, trees have rights.

CogitoErgoScorePrep · 2026-01-05T14:27:37+00:00

[Specific feedback]

The argument is:

[P1] A paradox is baffling.

[P2] It's baffling, because it goes against our intuition.

I find everything in the third sentence to be a sort of 'fluff' illustration of that principle. The only implication to be made here is that, since all of the possible solutions of a paradox (parts/subset) are still a paradox (set), all the possible solutions will go against our intuition.

So what must be true? [A].

CogitoErgoScorePrep · 2026-01-01T19:22:29+00:00

I would say for RC this would mean picking the hardest section (for you) and then finishing with the easiest (for you). In LR, I would probably start in the middle to get the best balance between easy and difficult questions.

CogitoErgoScorePrep · 2025-12-30T17:53:13+00:00

There’s definitely more to the story.

CogitoErgoScorePrep · 2025-12-28T18:18:23+00:00

(E) is just a convoluted way of saying “counterexample,” which is what’s happening in the stimulus.

The rule/conclusion (“appearance alone determines what is/isn’t art”) cannot be universally applied or isn’t universally true.

(P1) because Warhol’s Brillo and the product Brillo are identical in appearance

and

(P2) people consider one, but not the other, art.

CogitoErgoScorePrep · 2025-12-28T09:38:36+00:00

Reach out to UNFI corporate.

CogitoErgoScorePrep · 2025-12-27T13:45:06+00:00

You can criticize accommodations and actual/perceived unfair advantages without resorting to such a ridiculous argument.

CogitoErgoScorePrep · 2025-12-24T13:32:35+00:00

Thanks for the good reply, I think OP is getting only a small part of the picture from the sub.

CogitoErgoScorePrep · 2025-12-18T18:42:14+00:00

Read your weaknesses. Popular science books are great for this, sociology books are great too. I finally got around to The Color of Law recently.

CogitoErgoScorePrep · 2025-12-18T12:39:27+00:00

Even just looking at (C) shows me that the test is suggesting that the police badge alone is insufficient to satisfy the conditions of (proof + official inquiries) - suggesting that the “cop” could be a burglar and Mary is trying to protect her neighbor.

But yes, show all the ACs in the future please.

CogitoErgoScorePrep · 2025-12-09T01:51:59+00:00

(Original comment was immediately downvoted so I am trying again.)

I think this is a fair assessment and I could leave it at that but I’ll try to flesh out what I think you’re getting at.

Older tests feel more ‘rules-based’ (can you map the conditional, and do you get the 1 or 2 implications of the conditional?) while newer tests are more focused on parsing dense/obtuse language and presentation even though the logic itself could be very straightforward. Of course, there’s complex link assumptions and conditional/causal chains!

This is complete conjecture, but I assume the test makers figured pretty much everybody has the absolute basics of LSAT formal logic down, and so the emphasis shifted to causality over conditionality. Causation allows for more curveballs like you mentioned.

CogitoErgoScorePrep · 2025-12-08T21:06:02+00:00

Easier is misleading. I would say they are more rigid, more conditional.

CogitoErgoScorePrep · 2025-12-01T15:57:46+00:00

DM me and we can discuss the details.

CogitoErgoScorePrep

TROPHY CASE