LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

Get expert LSAT preparation and law school admissions advice from PowerScore Test Preparation.

 ellenb
  • Posts: 260
  • Joined: Oct 22, 2012
|
#8639
Yep, thanks a lot.
 netherlands
  • Posts: 136
  • Joined: Apr 17, 2013
|
#8947
Is it safe to say that the opening verbiage in this stimulus about "oneself" can be translated into "anyone who"? I think that's how I translated it and what allowed me to diagram it with "conditional" features.
 Steve Stein
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 1153
  • Joined: Apr 11, 2011
|
#8964
Hi Netherlands,

In that instance, the "about oneself" is important, so it should not just be changed to "anyone who..."

The point here is that you have to be really confident to tell jokes that are specifically about yourself.

I hope that's helpful!

~Steve
 netherlands
  • Posts: 136
  • Joined: Apr 17, 2013
|
#8991
Hi there,

What I was struggling with more was, whether or not I was using the correct indicators in order to know that this required conditional reasoning. In my mind I translated it as "anyone who/people who is/are able to tell jokes about oneself" - and that's how I kind of came about using conditional.

Does that sound about right? I read the explanation and saw that you guys did approve of the conditional reasoning approach (although I diagrammed it a tad bit wrong) - but didn't mention what your method of indicating that it was conditional was.
 Steve Stein
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 1153
  • Joined: Apr 11, 2011
|
#8993
Hey Netherlands,

Thanks for the clarification--that's right--you can certainly change that to "anyone who," as long as you maintain that description about being able to tell jokes about oneself.

~Steve
 reop6780
  • Posts: 265
  • Joined: Jul 27, 2013
|
#10168
Now that I see A closely, it is simply rephrased answer.

However, I had chosen C in that I misunderstood the last sentence of stimulus. "This willingness...more revealing than is good-matured acquiescence in having others poke fun at one."

I interpreted it in the following way that highly confident people make jokes to show their confidence with the word, "revealing."

I would appreciate the correct explanation to prove C is a wrong answer.

Thank you

Hyun Kim
 David Boyle
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 836
  • Joined: Jun 07, 2013
|
#10204
reop6780 wrote:On the page of 26, the question number 20, the answer is A.

Now that I see A closely, it is simply rephrased answer.

However, I had chosen C in that I misunderstood the last sentence of stimulus. "This willingness...more revealing than is good-matured acquiescence in having others poke fun at one."

I interpreted it in the following way that highly confident people make jokes to show their confidence with the word, "revealing."

I would appreciate the correct explanation to prove C is a wrong answer.

Thank you

Hyun Kim
Dear Hyun:

The word "revealing" does not necessarily imply that the confident will make jokes to show their confidence. It may mean "revealing" merely in a general sense. Also, choice A may be more like a contrapositive than just a restatement.

David
 reop6780
  • Posts: 265
  • Joined: Jul 27, 2013
|
#10239
Thank you, Dave!

Hyun Kim
 lbayliyeva@unm.edu
  • Posts: 24
  • Joined: Jun 15, 2014
|
#15006
For question 16, on the student center, it says that "since [WHFS -- SSC and WTFS -- SSC] have the same necessary condition (SSC), they can be combined" using 'or.' Why 'or' and not 'and'?' 'Or' is exclusive. It does not say in the paragraph that people, who have supreme self-confidence are either "willing to tell funny stories about oneself" or " willing to hear funny stories about oneself."

I also would like to confirm that to represent 'neither...nor' we use 'and.'

Thank you for your help in advance.
 BethRibet
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 200
  • Joined: Oct 17, 2012
|
#15015
Hi,

Thanks for writing in. "Or" does not necessarily mean both conditions can't simultaneously be true, it means that if either one is true, that's sufficient.
As in:

If someone hits my car, I will be angry.
If someone steals my wallet, I will be angry.
The two can be combined as: If someone hits my car, or steals my wallet, I will be angry.

Yes, for neither/nor, you would use "and".

Hope this helps!
Beth

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

Analyze and track your performance with our Testing and Analytics Package.