June 2013 LSAT, LR2, Q3, a punk letter to the editor

Crowdsourcing the June 2013 LSAT:  June 2013 LSAT Explanation Central | About this project I was terrified on the eve of teaching my very first LSAT class”¦ public speaking has always scared the shit out of me. My voice breaks, I forget everything I planned to say, and I sweat profusely. It's gross, and it's something I avoid at all costs. I'd prefer death to making a wedding toast. So that night, sitting on the roof of my old apartment in the Mission, I was close to quitting my LSAT teaching gig before it started. But my old friend Chantill Lopez was there to offer the single greatest piece of advice I have ever heard about teaching: “Just be honest,” she said. So the next night, in front of 20 LSAT students who trusted me with their careers, I opened with, “I'm contractually obligated not to tell you that this is my very first LSAT class.” It got a laugh, and I realized that my audience was actually on my side. Then I told them that I had scored a 179 on the LSAT, and that I'd like to help them see how easy it could be. I've never been nervous in front of an LSAT class in the five years since. I'm indebted to Chantill, a great teacher who now teaches teachers for a living.

Guest blogger: Chantill Lopez

I feel like a fish in the Sahara Desert. As someone who lives as far from the LSAT as you can possibly get (I teach Pilates teachers), I read the question five times and went crossed-eyed. But the fog cleared once I sat back and let go of my nervous assumptions and my crippling “please don't let me f____ this up” mentality. Without panic, visibility improves.

Here is what I see:

I don't like this argument, first of all, because the writer sounds like a punk, a punk who believes that they can validate an argument with paper-thin logic: that an assertion can be made about an entire group based on the behavior, opinion, or business practices of a single member of the group.

So, if I keep it simple and go with my first instinct I can dive into the answer choices.

(Editor's note: She might not know it, but Chantill has already answered the question... before looking at the answer choices. On this test, it is good to think the arguments are made by "punks." If you're angry at the argument, you probably already understand the heart of the matter. --n)

A makes no sense to me, because the writer doesn't even seem to be drawing any conclusions based on “premises that are entirely about what is the case.” We don't know what the case is. He doesn't assert enough of anything to make it this far. He simply pulls a reason out of his hat (editor's note: I would have said "ass" --n)  and calls it “inefficient” because it suits his position. This one seems pretty flimsy, although the language tied me up a little so I read it multiple times to be sure.

B is looking like a gem. It supports and even fuels my irritation with anyone who pretends to be smarter than they are.

C is just wrong. The author doesn't make it as far as really attacking the proponent of the claim. He goes right to the assertion that Byworks Corporation is representative of all nonprofit sector businesses... which is exactly what B described.

D is, again, off point. The answer talks about evidence, but in my mind no evidence or lack of evidence is being considered at all. (Editor's note: D is describing the flaw "absence of proof being taken as proof of the opposite," like "You can't prove there's life on Mars, therefore there is definitely not life on Mars." That's not what happened in this argument, so this isn't the answer. --n)

E ”¦well, at this point I think B is my answer and because I have to re-read E several times before I begin to gleam the point I decide that it is, in fact, not the answer I'm looking for. (Editor's note: E is describing a scenario like "Cigarette smoking is fun and causes cancer. Therefore cancer is fun." That's certainly not similar to what happened in the argument, so this isn't the answer. --n)

B it is.

Phew. Where was that drink recipe? Here I come, Lynchburg Lemonade.

So what am I doing on a LSAT blog? Good question”¦

At heart I'm a creative entrepreneur. In practice I'm a teacher of teachers and a writer. For the past 15 years I have taught Pilates, yoga, dance, meditation and other movement modalities to a wide variety of folks while developing an in-depth year-long mentoring program for teachers in training and running two Pilates studios. These days I am out of the studio working on my second book, which is very conveniently about teaching (useful tricks and tools for teachers of any sort), expanding my mentoring program to national and international stages, and building my fourth business – an online educational company called Skillful Teaching. What floats my boat and keeps me inspired is building relationships with teachers who want to be their best, take their teaching beyond the clockwork pieces of technique and blow the top off their potential. I write every day, re-write every day, and spend lots of time creating (and re-creating) my work. It's an awesome life and I'm happy to share a sliver of it here in the LSAT world.

Learn more about Chantill:

Books, Articles, and Videos Moving Beyond Technique – Amazon.com Blog – Skillful Teaching Blog Articles & Videos – Resources for Teachers

Businesses Skillful Teaching – Founder: Skillfulteaching.com & Skillfulteaching.com/teacher-training Pilates Collective - Co-Founder, Director of Education and Mentoring:  Pilatescollective.com/about Mobile Pilates Master – Founder, Principle: MobilePilatesMaster.com Pilates Student Retention – Co-founder: PilatesStudentRetention.com

Please ask questions and/or suggest corrections to anything that seems confusing... we want to make this the best resource we can for LSAT students. We'll have all the June 2013 explanations up as quickly as possible. Thanks for reading. Tell your friends! --nathan

Crowdsourcing the June 2013 LSAT:  June 2013 LSAT Explanation Central | About this project