Hi everyone! The original Insight LSAT Prep Course, launched in 2017, is now outdated. I have released a new series of eight videos that is updated for the modern test and incorporates all that I've learned tutoring since I released the original videos almost a decade ago. kzitem.info/door/PLafC0Olll40wXlcvb3JrIO1jkxuPJvz5D Thank you for all the support over the years. I hope you enjoy the new series. -Albert
@lolo2good
10 ай бұрын
Thank you Lord for the other side of KZitem …I no longer watch music videos, I must study for the LSAT! This guy is awesome! 🎉2024🎉
@laurynfarley
8 ай бұрын
i’m right with you ! we got this
@lolo2good
7 ай бұрын
@@laurynfarleywe will be lawyers 🎉 GOOD LUCK!!!
@peacesoundsstuff
7 ай бұрын
All Aboard, I had to physically get myself to change the habit Let’s crush this test!!!!
@samuelgyan1730
6 ай бұрын
Let do it guys and make him proud
@robertsloan3272
5 жыл бұрын
How could anyone dislike this video? It truly lays the foundation for development and improvement in all 3 subjects. Albert is an incredible teacher! Thank you for sharing your knowledge and posting this lesson.
@laurasolomon1522
2 жыл бұрын
Have you written your LSAT and how was it ?
@parzer0
2 жыл бұрын
For me it was his voice. Your comment made me click the dislike button because its very obvious not a presidential or militant voice but one of a kid learning through teaching using his shy microphone skills. I'm sure you aced the logical reasoning.
@damndragonflies
Жыл бұрын
@@parzer0 for me.. That’s exactly WHY I am sticking around for the next… I love his delivery!! I’m sure if a militant person was explaining all these symbols I might not understand so easily. He doesn’t assume you know anything.
@walabang437
Жыл бұрын
@@parzer0you posh bimbo
@SenseiLlama
Жыл бұрын
the people who disliked it sold competing courses. Then got outdone, for free.
@babuton
5 жыл бұрын
the "so" test has busted this shit open for me. thanks!
@aracelianaya7832
5 жыл бұрын
Right!! that made all the difference.
@GoodNews-px2im
Жыл бұрын
The “so rule” is golden! I’ve always been taught that whenever there is a “therefore” find out what it’s there for (finding premises that support or lead to the conclusion).
@06amaris
4 жыл бұрын
You are awesome..thank you so much for this. I have been procrastinating taking the LSAT for many many many years...i am now 40 yrs old and fully committed/motivated to reach my goals. Thank for helping with this journey!!
@MsBdoll87
3 жыл бұрын
thanks for sharing. i am 34 and have been the same way...procrastinating. what's the latest on your journey?
@vehement-critic_q8957
Жыл бұрын
@@MsBdoll87 I'm 30 here & an ESL that means I'm second speaker of English, so it's a little burdensome as language could be a barrier, but that tutor knows how to guide & show the way to success. & yeah, I'm just like you procrastinating due to circumstances out of my hands.
@LoveLifeAllWays
10 ай бұрын
Wow! I'm at the age now and I'm considering law school. I should have attended right after graduating. Did you attend law school!? If so how is it going?!
@coltonstogner4363
4 жыл бұрын
Wow youre amazing at explaining these complex logical relationships in a way that anyone can pick up on. Thank you for taking the time to create these videos and making this available for free
@chelseaamira6894
Жыл бұрын
This video has helped me soooooo much. You can't even begin to understand! This is what everyone should watch before even studying anything for the LSAT. Your teaching style makes it so easy to pay attention to,and understand what I'm learning, thus keeping me fully engaged the whole entire time. Thank you so much I cannot wait to watch the rest.
@withlovestephaniedenise7024
3 жыл бұрын
I was told about the LSAT from a lawyer, who told me it'd needed for law school. Soooo, I tried it without knowledge. I was lost. Then I found this video. Wow! I went back to the test, and although, its approach is new to me, I had a better understanding. Thank you,
@LanaIrsh
Жыл бұрын
I took a diagnostic test before watching this video and was tripping up on some logic games questions because I was spending too much time rereading the conditions and scenario, your methods have helped me so much and made me realize the amount of time I could have saved when doing those logic games.
@ttothemfd
7 жыл бұрын
This is fantastic. Thank you so much! Understanding these symbols and their application is going to help me exponentially
@scherretzfamily7196
2 жыл бұрын
I made a 144 the first time I took the LSAT just by watching the first couple of these videos. and that is after a trip to Vegas. I made a 136 after paying 1800 for one of those supposed prep courses.... which goes to show you the difference
@KnockOutCutie
Жыл бұрын
I really enjoyed this lesson your teaching style fits my learning style I’d pay for a whole course
@andrerobinson2923
Жыл бұрын
I finally caught on and was able to understand it as he went on. I got the majority of them correct. Thank you for explaining it the way you did.
@kristal0076
2 жыл бұрын
Hi, I scored 162 on practice test but want to do better. this vid is awesome to get my my crazy thoughts logical!
@ScottWitoff-hv1qx
10 ай бұрын
Every lesson Insight LSAT teaches is excellent. I'm watching one of those lessons. I can conclude that I am watching an excellent lesson. 🙂
@uchechigenevieve7324
Жыл бұрын
I have watched a lot of videos, yours is the only one so far that explained thing in a very clear and understandable way.
@lolo2good
10 ай бұрын
Very true! I took a course in college, but all they did was send me some practice books that made no sense until I started watching these videos, but now I will understand my PrepTest books a lot better!
@lolo2good
7 ай бұрын
Same!!!!
@alyssa01825
6 ай бұрын
Taking the LSAT this summer, thanks for your course
@laminar28
6 жыл бұрын
These videos are excellent, and I suggest anyone looking to raise some points go through the entire lesson plan!
@jinxy_jinx1392
4 ай бұрын
im a grade 10 student in legal studies, we are doing a Lsat (for marks) and these videos help a lot thanks!
@chrisbrodie5650
Жыл бұрын
Thank you for putting this program together. Helps me study the LSAT. I work full time and I hope this works for high scores!!!
@allissberry6959
8 ай бұрын
These videos are very helpful and study tips to help prepare me for the LSAT test. I plan to take it either this year or next year for sure, I hope I do a good job.
@toksfashable
6 жыл бұрын
Amazing lesson, thank you for taking the time to explain all these to us. I really learnt a lot!
@JacksonDahlen107
5 жыл бұрын
Working through these over the next week. Bless your soul.
@davidndoma9286
2 жыл бұрын
I feel pumped after watching this video. Thank you for such a great video.
@alesanchez8492
2 жыл бұрын
this channel is a gem
@shrinidhiharwadekar2706
4 жыл бұрын
i was so scared for the LSAT exam. Thank you so much sir, this video has made me very easy to study now.
@johngivens5004
7 жыл бұрын
Great video got me thinking logically now I'm a keep working at it everyday from now on
@criminalscumx
5 жыл бұрын
John Givens You can start by practicing basic English grammar.
@nufirmdm
5 жыл бұрын
@@criminalscumx shut the fuck up
@PengNation
7 жыл бұрын
Great video. Watching this after I took a cold diagnostic test and I can see how much of the symbolic representations especially might have been useful during the test. A suggestion: on the slide on numerical proportions, it might be more accurate/clearer to say 50%< than 51%+ etc.
@uria702
6 жыл бұрын
I agree. Change it to >= or
@hard2getitrightagain314
Жыл бұрын
This is an important point. There is a lot of territory between 51% and 49%. 50% + 1 is one way I was taught. Even that is too broad. >50% is the most correct, I imagine.
@NoeItorious
7 жыл бұрын
This was really fun. Nailed it too. Thanks!
@itswolvesgate
2 жыл бұрын
Best LSAT video I have seen so far thanks 👍👍👍
@bradcooke5383
Жыл бұрын
Good video for LSAT prep. At 58:06 there's a false statement. Echidnas and the duck billed platypus are both mammals and both lay eggs.
@millicentpepion
4 жыл бұрын
OMG.. I"m so excited!! Thank you for putting this together!!
@alexzylka4867
10 ай бұрын
thank you & thanks to KZitem..
@chrisbrodie5650
Жыл бұрын
Now my goal is 179
@carolinan4768
3 жыл бұрын
Love the way you teach! Thank you very much! Love this!
@damndragonflies
Жыл бұрын
Thank you…. not sure yet how it applies to the LSAT!! But I appreciate this before I pay for my tutor and take any practice exams!!
@quitamartor4314
2 жыл бұрын
WOW, thank you so much for these lessons; I've a LSAT to write on Monday July 4. Very sure this would help me 🙏
@hailskay
2 жыл бұрын
how did it go??
@hhhsp951
3 жыл бұрын
In response to the negation of "If you prepare for the LSAT, you will do well... ", instead of filling in random bubbles and doing well, it might just make perfect sense to you.
@Duckgoose17
4 жыл бұрын
Wow I am actually understanding and getting this...Exciting....ty for sharing
@kifeda
9 ай бұрын
I'm struggling but this is a really good video. Like excellent.
@simsimmons8884
2 жыл бұрын
Question. At 9:34 you present the "so test" on the paragraph regarding taking the LSATs. I see another conclusion as "so, practicing LSAT questions is an effective way of improving your LSAT score." Why is this not the conclusion? This seems as logical as "so, time spent practicing LSAT questions is thus time well spent." It seems that the only indicator to pick one over the other is that " time spent practicing LSAT questions is thus time well spent." is a more general conclusion. Is this test something that should be added to the final determination of which conclusion is the final conclusion? The more general the conclusion, the more final it is.
@cecilialaracengiz2848
5 жыл бұрын
Hi, on the practice problems, the one that says "if nobody helps, I am going to quit" you started with H--> Q shouldn't it be a negated -H first since its nobody helps and the negated version would be somebody helped.
@cecilialaracengiz2848
5 жыл бұрын
I really like your videos by the way. They are very helpful.
@maxwilk8290
Жыл бұрын
52:15 wouldnt if be considered "sufficient but not necessary" condition? Therefore if Jamal is not happy, we still don't know if it is not snowing? wouldn't it need to be Only if it is snowing, Jamal is happy or If and only if it is snowing, jamal is happy. We cannot rotate the argument if it is only a sufficent cause without having an assumption. Correct me if I am wrong.
@emorgan7498
Жыл бұрын
I was searching the comments for this exact question. He lost me there! My thought,I think was a little different. In his first example, "if I don't have a map, I will get lost".. he said I could still get lost with a map. So, in this example, couldn't he be happy even if it's NOT snowing?
@LATHSPELL70
5 жыл бұрын
If nobody helps, I am going to quit. H --> Q ¬Q --> ¬H. I put ¬H ---> Q, as in nobody helped (¬H). Is there a logical fallacy that I am not connecting if I do it this way. My contrapositive ended up looking like this: ¬Q -> H (at least one person helped). Seems like I'm saying the same thing, but making sure I didn't miss something.
@ajmalr4790
3 жыл бұрын
Same thing I just did in my head!
@r.p.8906
2 жыл бұрын
'Nobody helps" is already a negation of Help and so, it will be --, H---> Q contrapositive is --, Q--> H. ( 0-1)
@theelizabethanway
6 жыл бұрын
The Tom example...heartbroken Tom..Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers. And LuluLemon....love the puns
@cryptocanada3038
3 жыл бұрын
oh wow! I didn't even pick that up. Great eye!
@abracadabra2395
5 жыл бұрын
Questions: 1. Isn't the missing piece the assumption that Tom will ask her out, not that she will say no if he does? The former isn't explicitly stated, while the latter is. 2. The Lu sisters could own a lemon tree and the entire argument could be junk. This feels like a more blatant missing logic leap than the one you pointed out with Tom's broken heart. What am I not understanding? (Also, thank you for these videos!!)
@politico6792
5 жыл бұрын
Abra Morgan I’m no expert, but the concepts of symbolic logic don’t pick up these nuances of language. You treat every statement as a truth
@ohandromeda6995
Жыл бұрын
At 1:12:00 would writing the symbols (neg)H ---> Q, with the second being (neg)Q ---> H be correct? When speaking out loud I read as If I don't quit, at least one person helped.
@philmascia1424
3 ай бұрын
I know your post is over a year old, but I was working that question and I thought the same thing you did. Especially, because the Pink Floyd If you don’t eat your meat question was (neg)M-->(neg)P……I wish you had gotten a reply to your comment. .?.
@ginikaurpropertiesgroup7840
6 жыл бұрын
I love it! Thank you for all the great exercises and help!
@anthax1
5 жыл бұрын
my first time trying these out, seems complicated but pretty straight forward with some practice.
@cryptocanada3038
3 жыл бұрын
I can't believe how much I love this shit!
@AlliYAFF
4 жыл бұрын
Wait...the whole "some" thing seems to contradict most of what I have learned in logic. Wouldn't it be apt to say that "some students passed the exam" even if only one student did?
@myrrhyahmi
8 ай бұрын
How dare you say I am not a good student? With no premises? Unbelievable. 😢 -Mary
@napnap609
5 жыл бұрын
In the example of conditionals with "only", I get the first statement "I will attend ONLY if I can afford it, to which you offer a counter thought of: You may not go even if you CAN afford it. Great I get that. But in the boiling water example you don't offer a counter thought. Is there one? "Only if enough heat is applied to it does water boil". So that's definitely a necessary condition, but how is that not sufficient?
@ymerithebeloved
2 жыл бұрын
this is really helpful and i really like the way you teach. thank you so much!
@jayl2331
Жыл бұрын
“So test” Very nice!
@AuzSanchez
6 ай бұрын
1:11:55 can you explain why you wouldn't negate H in the last question in the initial answer? I negated it because of the word "nobody" and then in the contrapositive there was no negation for H. I hope this makes sense!
@kwameshakaopare925
4 жыл бұрын
I apologize if you already answered - on the conditions w/only...the water boiling example, you never explain why it’s not sufficient. The “will attend only” made things very clear but what is insufficient of the heat/water one. Please and thank you
@hhhsp951
3 жыл бұрын
I went for NotP instead of C because in this scenario the parade (P) would not have happened if it had rained (R)
@syedmammar1
6 жыл бұрын
Learned a great deal. Thank you.
@kjaniece
4 жыл бұрын
I had a question about the falsifying numerical statements. On the most of the questions, is it possible to say all or because “all” was not used in the PowerPoint prior, it can not be used as an answer? Ex- some children dance translates to “it’s not the case that some children dance. The only answer that was given was 0-1 children dance. Can “all”also be used?
@YusufSiddiqui-c1u
5 ай бұрын
Another LSAT video said "some" means an unknown amount but yours says 2+. Which is correct?
@samnunn3948
4 жыл бұрын
Would the contrapositive of the Sam Bart Alex portion be; If not Bart ^(and) Alex -> not Walking -> not enough Time v(or) not Sam. ??? Edit: If not B ^ A > not W > not T v S
@ruqaia9563
9 ай бұрын
for the Q (if nobody helps, I am going to quit) I wrote it as (no H > Q) then the opposite ( 1+ Q > H) meaning I interpret no bady helps as a negative scenario. I'm not sure if it's only another way or it going to affect the result in more complicated situations
@BoulderBoulder_
6 ай бұрын
I should've watched these videos while I was taking symbolic logic lol. Also, can confirm, symbolic logic was way harder than the material I've seen on the LSAT so far haha
@chrisgreen1579
4 жыл бұрын
Great resource so far
@jonawells8064
2 жыл бұрын
Can you explain why these are the conclusions? The LSAT question I didn’t understand why exactly it was “Time spent practicing LSAT questions is this time well spent”
@SingingDiaries
7 жыл бұрын
This was so so helpful! Thank you for uploading this :D
@willonz
4 жыл бұрын
@35:11 water can boil if pressure is low enough, too. Does this example assume this as well?
@elle9633
4 жыл бұрын
Excellent! Thank you!
@Rm9512
Жыл бұрын
i have a question: in the practice section at the end of the video, in the symbolic logic of "if nobody helps, i will quit..." shouldn't the symbol for help be positive? without the negation symbol? idkw i'm not getting that. would really love to know what i misunderstood!
@aigarcia123
3 жыл бұрын
Maybe i've just been using the English language wrong, but to me, If it is snowing, then Mike and Josh can be found at the library, the contrapositive would be if Mike and Josh can't be found at the library, then it is not snowing. changing it to in the contrapositive makes it seem like both didn't have to be true in the first part. Might just be i've been saying it wrong my whole life. lemme know
@amynguyen6411
7 жыл бұрын
Thank you for making such a great video!
@troymcdougal9010
Жыл бұрын
You said "Most" and (assumedly) "The majority of" can be 100% of the items, but can "a minority of" be 0% or does it have to be at least 1 of the item?
@uria702
6 жыл бұрын
I scored 155 on a diagnostics going in blind and never having researched the test. I’m trying to get it up to 170 points by learning the right strategies and methods for this test. Within 6 months. Do you think that’s reasonable?
@Hurlzaz
6 жыл бұрын
That's very reasonable. 155 is quite good having never researched the test. It's certainly achievable.
@lordvader5246
3 жыл бұрын
I have a question regarding the conditional "only" example of: "only if enough heat is applied to it does water boil." This might be a matter of interpretation but when I read "enough heat" im assuming its suggesting that there is "enough heat to get water to boil" in which case applying "enough heat" to water to get it to boil would make it both necessary and sufficient to get water to boil which would make it an "if and only if" statement as opposed to an "only" statement. Can someone explain why I am wrong or if I just interpreting this differently? He didnt spend a lot of time answering that example.
@kmcken0001
Жыл бұрын
I am confused about this too, does anyone have an explanation?
@Applecompuser
5 жыл бұрын
There was reference to a free worksheet on the website, however, I do not see it. Does anyone know where this worksheet is? PS This is a great video series! Thanks for sharing them. PSS If anyone else is prepping for the LSAT now, I would be happy to do a study group even if by Facetime etc.
@About_Argo
5 жыл бұрын
I know it's late, I hope this is the correct one. www.insightlsat.com/worksheet
@ikarhbzgahk276
7 жыл бұрын
I took a logic course a couple years ago so this all makes sense to me
@amoontree
Жыл бұрын
Lol
@geetar16
5 жыл бұрын
Question.. For "If nobody helps, I am going to quit." Why is "nobody helps" represented by 'H' rather than negated 'H'? (¬H)
@geetar16
5 жыл бұрын
When we symbolized "If you don't eat your meat" we used negation '¬M' I'm wondering what the difference is between "didn't eat meat" and "nobody helped"
@zachsabe
5 жыл бұрын
@@geetar16good question i was wondering the same. maybe he sees it not as a negation but as "0 helpers" and that in itself is not a negation?
@donnakim6208
5 жыл бұрын
Because if you use "not H" for nobody helps, in the negation, it becomes "Q -> H" which means if I quit - help. This might lead to the extreme since "helps" can mean at least one person helps, many people help or all help. However if you just take some extra trouble to say in your head that H stands for "nobody helps," the negation of "H->Q" will be '"not Q -> not H" meaning If I am not quitting, it is not that nobody helped = If I am not quitting at least one person helped.
@imranhowcani1981
4 жыл бұрын
you just made the introduction easy
@petercho7660
5 жыл бұрын
Hi! Thanks for the video. In the example "If many people attend the party, we will need to hire a server", you said the negation is "If we don't need to hire a server, then ..." I was wondering what the implication of "if we don't need to hire a server" is. Does that mean we don't hire any servers, or does it mean that you don't hire A server (either no servers or many servers)?
@yuanjoyce6663
4 жыл бұрын
for practice at 59:35. I think it should be K--D, seems if K does, D does. If you do D--K, it would be D does, as a result , K does. Right?! So answer should be -D --- -K
@samme1024
2 жыл бұрын
"If nobody helps, I'm going to quit." Shouldn't that be a negative on the help to begin with?
@bhayovah
2 жыл бұрын
Isn't the negation of some "none" (and the same for "a few")?
@LucianaFerreiraHervey
2 жыл бұрын
Thanks! Your videos are great!!!
@insightlsat
2 жыл бұрын
Thank you too!
@cherub6303
2 жыл бұрын
Hi, do you still offer tutoring? I am taking the lsat February 12 and need help. Please let me know if you are able to! Thank you.
@maleekielshamsa513
3 жыл бұрын
1:06:00 Please advise Why is it not Jan or Kyle instead of Jan and Kyle? Since it was originally a disjunction??
@sohakaviani421
Жыл бұрын
Doesn't some mean 1+? Like at least one and more? At 26:08 you say 2+ for some. Thank you for the great videos btw.
@Cjeffersonjensen
8 ай бұрын
at 1:12:00 shouldnt it be NOT H then Q because it says "if NOBODY helps" ? Cause then wouldn't it be -H → Q and the contrapositive -Q → H ?
@AuzSanchez
6 ай бұрын
thats what i did haha
@treynoe4934
Жыл бұрын
In the conditionals sections can someone explain what he means by Sufficient and Necessary conditions? I understand necessary, but the definition of sufficient was muddied by the "if and only if" conditionals
@IsaacWMayer
Жыл бұрын
You’re my hero! 💯
@nicolemarini7540
6 жыл бұрын
question: at 19:22, the exercise with Erica and Tom. Could the intermediate conclusion be: Erica will say no, excluding ?
@joshuarizek9043
6 жыл бұрын
thats exactly what bothered me about this. to say "she will definitely say no" and " she will say no tomorrow" are very close to the same thing. I don't see why that intermediate conclusion is necessary.
@insightlsat
6 жыл бұрын
The argument is all about what's going to happen tomorrow, so we have to keep that in there.
@fancydiamondllc4256
2 жыл бұрын
Very good practice
@psykored524
6 жыл бұрын
@59:13 when I read that sentence I right away thought of Pink Floyd haha
@haleydoe2279
Жыл бұрын
... however, High school students use text books for more often than most citizens, and can be used more than once. Therefore, the textbooks may be used by more citizens overall.
@sadeekwalker6355
7 жыл бұрын
Amazing videos.
@mazinsyed7279
5 жыл бұрын
so when writing counter positives you always have to negate the conjunctions and the disconjunctions from both sides in all cases? correct
@taylorwild2943
Жыл бұрын
Can you prove how enough heat applied to the water isnt sufficient for it boiling
@Pegalomania
5 жыл бұрын
Very helpful & kind, thank you.
@purseeggXD
Жыл бұрын
35:55 but if enough heat is applied, water logically must boil, where is the insufficient part here?
@ryanyamamoto4295
Жыл бұрын
Not a chemist but it has to do with disturbance or something. Water can be sufficiently heated to boiling temperatures in the microwave but it won’t start boiling until it’s disturbed (or some form of motion or something ).
Пікірлер: 244