Along with My Life

看過『哈利波特 神秘的魔法石(Harry Potter And The Philosopher's Stone)』的人，應該對邏輯遊戲不陌生。

危險在前，安全在後，Danger lies before you, while safety lies behind,
我們之中有兩個可以給你援手，Two of us will help you,
但你得先把它們給喝進口，whichever you would find.
七個裡面有一個可以讓你繼續前進，One among us seven will let you move ahead,
另一個會將飲者送回門後。Another will transport the drinker back instead.
我們有兩個裡面只裝著蕁麻酒，Two among our number hold only nettle wine,
三個是殺手，藏在隊伍中靜靜等候。Three of us are killers, waiting hidden in line.
選擇吧，除非你想永遠在此逗留，Choose, unless you wish to stay here forevermore,
為了幫助你選取，在此提供你四個線索：To help you in your choice, we give you these clues four:
首先，不論毒藥藏得多麼滑頭，First, however slyly the poison tries to hide
你總是往蕁麻酒的左邊去走；You will always find some on nettle wine's left side;
其次，左右兩端的飲料都沒有毒，Second, different are those who stand at either end,
但你若想繼續前進，他們就不是你的朋友；But if you would move forward, niether is your friend;
第三，如你所見，七個瓶子個個不同，Third, as you see clearly, all are different size,
矮鬼或巨人裡面，都沒有死神在等候；Neither dwarf nor giant holds death in their insides;
第四，左邊第二與右邊第二乍見之下完全不同，Fourth, the second left and second on the right
嚐了以後才知道它們是無獨有偶。Are twins once you taste them, though different at first sight.

不過哈利波特有妙麗代他解答，我們這些LSAT準考生就沒這麼幸運了~

從頭解釋一下，LSAT是Law School Admission Test的簡稱，由LSAC (Law School Admission Council)在每年的2,6,10,12月提供考試。
美國的大學裡並沒有法律系，最多只有Pre-Law，因此，大學非法律科系畢業但想去唸Law School的人就必須要接受這一關入門測試，之後才能提出申請。
不過因為大家都等於是非本科系的學生，所以LSAT並不考法律相關知識，所有的考題內容都是邏輯問題，據說主要是為測試考生推論、判斷、分析及評估的能力。
題目類型根據官方說法分為：
Reading Comprehension、Analytical Reasoning、Logical Reasoning和Writing Comprehension。
Jeff老師解釋這些官方名詞在課程上將會各自以Reading、Argument、Game和Writing代表出現。
標準的LSAT考試一共分為四個計分section、一個不計分實驗section外加一個不計分的Writing section。
記分的四個scetion則包含兩個Argument、一個Reading和一個Game section；不計分實驗section的內容則不一定，會從Argument、Reading和Game裡挑一個出來進行；Writing section雖然一樣不計分，但是會保留作為受試者的writing sample，法學院可以要求LSAC提供作為審核參考。

Jeff老師的授課則集中教授Reading、Argument和Game，其中又以Argument的部分最為吃重。
Argument也就是所謂的Analytical Reasoning，首重分析判斷，從一小段文字裡分析出答題的重點，再從選項裡判斷最合適的答案。
舉一個泡最喜歡的題目做例子^^
In a study, shoppers who shopped in a grocery store without a shopping list and bought only items that were on sale for half price or less spent far more money on a comparable number of item than did shoppers in the same store who used a list and bought no sale items.

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to explain the apparent paradox in the study's result?
(A) Only the shoppers who used a list used a shopping cart.
(B) The shoppers who did not use list bought many unnecessary items.
(C) Usually, only the most expensive items go on salein grocery story.
(D) The grocery store in the study carries many expensive items that few other grocery stores carry.
(E) The grocery store in the study places relatively few items on sale.

這種題目偶爾來個一兩題，感覺很好玩~ 不過問題是，不是所有的題目都這麼友善、這麼生活化...
比方說，也有這種題目
Ecologist: Forest fires, the vast majority of which are started by lightning, are not only a natural phenomenon to which all forest ecosystems are well adapted, but are required for many forest to flourish. Forest fires facilitate the opening and spreading of speed pods, prevent an overaboundance of insects, and promote the diversity of forests by preventing certain varieties of aggressive weeds from dominating other species. In view of this, systematic attempts by human beings to prevent or control forest fires are ill-advised and shortsighted; forest fires should be left alone and allowed to burn themselves out naturally.

The conclusion draw above follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?
(A) Human intervention in natural processes tends to reduce the biological diversity of ecosystems.
(B) Protection of forests and their ecosystems is the only legitimate reason for attempting to prevent or control forest fires.
(C) Forest fires begun by careless campers should be the target of human fire control efforts.
(D) Human tend to view forest as well as other ecosystems as instruments for the satisfaction of human needs.
(E) If the health of an ecosystem is threatened by insects or other predators, human beings should not intervene to block that threat.

一個section有35分鐘作答時間，Argument section需回答24~26題，如果以全部答畢為目標，平均每題只有不到兩分鐘的作答時間，對大部分的考生來說都是非常緊迫的狀況。除了必須搶時間之外，還必須維持答題的正確率，讓剛進入課程的我們陷入某種似乎無可避免的恐慌狀態。

能夠跟上進度的，似乎暫時只有TAS畢業的Jeff、Melody和去年已經考過一次LSAT目前就讀於台大的Jessy。課堂上，老師提出的問題也大概都是他們三位在回應。如果連他們都答不出來，就只好任教室陷入沉默當中。
泡想，Jeff老師應該不是很習慣這種上課氣氛吧?? 不過這也是一般台灣教室的普遍狀況，反正課堂上就是老師ㄧ個人的獨角戲，用功的班就刷刷刷的猛抄筆記，不想上課的學生會去打盹或是在桌下偷看別的書~ 大膽一點的就翹課走掉算了~
不過對初次見識LSAT，已經繳了三萬多塊學費，又沒別的選擇不得不面對的我們來說，翹課實在不是個很好的選項，所以即使上到一半腦袋會當機，也還是要硬逼著自己把黑板上那堆「分開都了解，組合起來就意味不明」的東西給吞下去。

簡媜女士在科羅拉多州見識了當地「老師的十二樣見面禮」，Jeff老師在Argument section給我們的見面禮則是：Necessary, Sufficient和很‧多‧的‧功‧課。
Necessary和Sufficient指的是解題時必須分辨，會直接或間接影響結果的條件，很多的功課則是讓我們即使離開教室還是會常常被煩到想砸東西的原因.... 泡那一陣子都常常有滿到喉嚨頭，再多就要吐出來的感覺...
不過比起班上的其他同學，泡應該還是打混得多。
已經有過一次試場經驗的Jessy顯然是比其他人老道得多，除了教材之外，他手邊還有什麼LSAT寶典?? 聖經?? 讓同學們一聽又忙著去影印，打算找更多的練習題來，看看能不能在考前勤能補拙一下~
個性意外很有台灣味的Jeff，因為是個道地的ABC，英文一把罩，人又耐心好相處，對課程的了解顯然也比我們深得多，於是沒多久就成了教室裡免費的助教。不敢跟老師討論問題的同學，都喜歡找他幫忙。
後來坐到泡隔壁的Charlotte，對於練習題和教材總是不停翻來覆去的看、研究、檢討，課本裡夾著的螢光筆、重點、計算過程滿天飛。每次一進教室就可以看到她忙著跟助教討論題目，聽說e-mail、MSN也是每天馬不停蹄的~
對於這些同學孜孜不倦的學習態度，泡完全是自嘆不如，而課程就在泡的擔心、掙扎但懶散中開始了。