Crowdsourcing the June 2013 LSAT: June 2013 LSAT Explanation Central | About this project Rachel was already scoring in the mid-160s when I met her, and by the end of her 8-week LSAT class I'm sure she could have taught it. Some rare people just have a knack for it. Some rarer people have both a knack for it and the desire to bust their ass. Even though Rachel scored perfectly on most of the Logic Games sections we did for homework, and even though half of my class is spent explaining those very same Games, Rachel showed up on time every night and sat in the very first row. Attorneys aren't half-assers. Rachel didn't want to just be good at the LSAT”¦ she wanted to be great.
Guest blogger: Rachel McCauley
So, first things first, folktales”¦ usually weird stories that do lack deeper meaning, at least in my opinion. Usually they involve bizarre situations with nice people, weird talking animals, one cool dude who knows everything about everyone, and bad stuff happening for no good reason.
But, apparently the literary critic doesn't think folktales lack deeper meaning. We know that the literary critic disagrees with what “some” think from the phrase “but this is not the case.” So, let's check the evidence for this. The evidence is that a folktale is passed on to each generation and in this way they provide great inside into the wisdom of the culture. So, to sum up the argument of the literary critic”¦ the conclusion: Folktales do not lack deeper meaning. Why? Because they build in a way that provides great insight into the wisdom of the culture. At this point you should be like, what??? What does great insight into the wisdom of a culture have to do with "deeper meaning"? Exactly! They aren't the same thing. This argument has made a big leap in logic. It has assumed that tales that provide insight into the wisdom of a culture are meaningful. Since this is a Sufficient Assumption question, we need an answer that bridges that gap. Let's check out the choices.
A: This answer says nothing about folktales and deeper meaning so it doesn't support the argument. Moving on!
B: BINGO! This is what we predicted. If it is the case that any tale that provides insight into the wisdom of a culture is deeply meaningful, then the argument works. B is "sufficient," i.e. "enough," to prove the argument's conclusion when added to the argument's facts.
C: Who cares if something is told for entertainment or not?? That's not the same thing as being “told in an entertaining way.” I'm looking for something that connects "insight into the wisdom of a culture" to "deeper meaning." This doesn't do that, so I'm moving on.
D: Oh snap! This is going in the backward direction. Tempting, but we know better.
E: Again, having the purpose of entertainment is not the same thing as being entertaining. We don't care. And we were already in love with B.
From Rachel: I'm from Moraga, CA. I went to UC Santa Babara and graduated with honors as a double major in business economics and psychology in 2011. I'm passionate about access to education, and I currently volunteer as a mentor at East Bay College Fund, where I help low income students grapple with the demands of college, as many of them are the first of their families to attend. I currently work at a law firm in downtown San Francisco, where I get a little taste of my lawyer dreams. In my free time I enjoy baking, running, interior design, and random DIY projects that sometimes involve driving to a local lumber yard and picking out wood even though I don't know sh*t about wood. I just like building things. I'm also a super math nerd; I've been known to hang out doing math problems for fun, especially the puzzle kind on the GRE. My favorite part of the LSAT is figuring how to set up challenging games and mastering them.
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