Questions in the LSAT Trainer

    • July 9, 2017 at 4:05 pm #3152
      emily21
      Participant

      Hi,

      Are all of the questions in the LSAT Trainer actual LSAT questions. I assume they are but just wanted to double check.

      Emily

    • July 10, 2017 at 3:18 pm #3155
      Mike Kim
      Keymaster

      Hi Emily —

      I create hypothetical games scenarios and logical reasoning arguments and such for instruction and exercises, just as I think every other LSAT book does, but the full questions/games/passages used are actual LSAT q’s (over 200 in the book), and the distinction between practice and official will be very obvious (for example, every official Q is stamped with preptest, section, and #) —

      Good luck with your studies — MK

    • July 28, 2017 at 7:21 pm #3183
      cece
      Participant

      This one has been killing me for a while. I felt the book was unclear and it’s been driving me crazy to be lacking this principle. Below are the questions I have regarding overvaluing opinions:

      According to the book,” overvalues an opinion is when the author makes an assumption that something is true because someone said so.”
      1) By “someone”, you meant someone ELSE right? As in a 2nd speaker; another opinion right?

      There are stimulus where the author is the only voice and he makes a conclusion based on his own assumption, no other opinion. Will that count as overvaluing opinion also?

      The book only has two examples, they both involved a 2nd speaker making an opinion.

      This exam really makes you overthink

    • July 28, 2017 at 11:14 pm #3186
      LSAT Dan
      Participant

      When the author is the only voice, you have more of a “fails to consider” flaw. I don’t want to speak for Mike, particularly as different authors/teachers may categorize things differently, but I believe your instincts are correct that they’re two different things; the overvalued opinion is more what would be called the “appeal to authority,” and it’s basically the opposite of an ad hominem attack – relying exclusively (or almost) on someone else’s say-so rather than any actual evidence. That’s different than the tunnel vision type of flaw where someone only sees one possible conclusion.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.