I feel like I don't understand how this would be useful because throughout the course so far we haven't focused on how questions or passages look on the actual LSAT. We so far have just discussed logic and arguments in a general sense. It would be very helpful for someone like me who is using this course as his or her main source of learning material if we delved into how the LSAT looks earlier and more consistently so that we understand how these lessons will apply to the test.
hard agree. im wondering how all these things will come into play. it just feels like we're spending so much time on these core lessons but we're rly going back and forth with the ideas we're learning
I've using 7sage and The LSAT Trainer together. The LSAT Trainer goes directly into discussing the questions that will show up on tests. I feel like by using these two materials together to study is so much better because 7sage courses build the foundation for me. So when I look at the sample questions (especially reading comprehension), I found myself naturally doing grammar analysis, spotting indicators and identifying premise/conclusions. these foundation made comprehension less painful!! Definitely recommend combining different studying materials for the LSAT, never just rely on one source.
#tip I have done this lesson now 3 times (everything under the umbrella of conditionals). I did it initially then finished LR. Came back and did this entire section again. Then went and finished RC and am back on this. I now can say I 100% understand it, especially having done the entire course. If it is difficult, and you have the time and mental strength to re-read and watch lessons, please do it. It will pay off!
@8M_M8 Agreed, I feel like LSAT questions should be inserted throughout each lesson as we go along, so we can get familiar with how to apply these methods. Smh, it's a lot to remember.
When you see tons of sufficient conditions, just focus on the ones that are most important. How do you know they're important? They can be argued or contested (I think).
The first 2 listed arent as important. 3 and 4 are important so just focus on those. Prioritize the important sufficient conditions and set aside the not-so-important ones.
i wish they would start implementing actual LSAT questions so we can see the technique applied. All these techniques and I am so confused when the time comes to apply them to legitimate LSAT questions
#feedback put this section immediately next to a complex, logical reasoning test question with a walk through video. This section appears too early in my opinion without an LSAT test question example to apply this in immediately after (or before). Also with a video explanation like in the sections ahead.
@mahi0615 essentially all this lesson is saying is if necessary, ignore sufficient conditions that aren’t relevant. But this is a double edge sword because like what the lesson showed, you could have a question that talks about “London” yada yada. And that should clue you in that you’re in NYC. Honestly this lesson is counterproductive. Ignore conditions but not ignore conditions? That just takes more brain cycles to track overall.
This is how I'd apply it to a recent article I just read.
Mikie Sherrill announced that 770 tickets to World Cup matches in MetLife Stadium will be given to NJ residents. Of that number, they have set several qualifiers for ticket distribution (I'd list them all here, but it'd be way too long).
However, for simplicity, let's say 500 were going towards military, 200 for healthcare, and 70 for supporters of small businesses. These are all sufficient conditions (In the military -> Qualify for Ticket, in healthcare -> Qualify for Ticket, etc).
Being a NJ resident is also a sufficient condition, but obviously the governor of NJ is not going to offer free tickets to MetLife Stadium to New Yorkers or Texans. So, we would "kick it up to the domain" because we'd expect that condition to be satisfied.
This strategy has been so helpful in better understanding complex argument structures! No other LSAT course that I have taken has provided this approach.
I could be wrong, but I am assuming that what the domain is, is a way for you to focus on the argument that matters the most. In the example that was used, there are four sufficient conditions that trigger the necessary condition. NYC was put up in the domain, because for the rule to apply, it has to be assumed that the person lives in New York. When you put it all together, it is just a way to compartmentalize and focus on the sufficient conditions that truly matters and make things a bit more easier!
You know what? It really did for me lol. When I first went through this I was like...wtf is going on here???? I skipped forward to LG then back to the LR lessons before taking the LSAT. I restarted the section on Conditional and Set Theory from scratch a month later and everything just clicked. Including this lesson today. So there is hope, I promise!
o...m...g.. ive paused it, ive come back, ive rewinded, ive played 3 times, i opend my laptop 15 minutes ago after killing some questions, i do not for the life of me understand this
119 comments
#feedback
I feel like I don't understand how this would be useful because throughout the course so far we haven't focused on how questions or passages look on the actual LSAT. We so far have just discussed logic and arguments in a general sense. It would be very helpful for someone like me who is using this course as his or her main source of learning material if we delved into how the LSAT looks earlier and more consistently so that we understand how these lessons will apply to the test.
hard agree. im wondering how all these things will come into play. it just feels like we're spending so much time on these core lessons but we're rly going back and forth with the ideas we're learning
#feedback
I've using 7sage and The LSAT Trainer together. The LSAT Trainer goes directly into discussing the questions that will show up on tests. I feel like by using these two materials together to study is so much better because 7sage courses build the foundation for me. So when I look at the sample questions (especially reading comprehension), I found myself naturally doing grammar analysis, spotting indicators and identifying premise/conclusions. these foundation made comprehension less painful!! Definitely recommend combining different studying materials for the LSAT, never just rely on one source.
retweet
I'm glad someone else said this lol, feel the same way
#tip I have done this lesson now 3 times (everything under the umbrella of conditionals). I did it initially then finished LR. Came back and did this entire section again. Then went and finished RC and am back on this. I now can say I 100% understand it, especially having done the entire course. If it is difficult, and you have the time and mental strength to re-read and watch lessons, please do it. It will pay off!
Thats useful to know!
An example of a real LSAT question should be inserted in this lesson.
@8M_M8 Agreed, I feel like LSAT questions should be inserted throughout each lesson as we go along, so we can get familiar with how to apply these methods. Smh, it's a lot to remember.
@Shannell_E'llan agree 100%
@Shannell_E'llan I could not agree more! @ 7sage team please add more questions after the lessons!!! #feedback
Domain Expansion: Conditional Simplification
You reckon Gojo can bypass this?
Basically (oversimplified)
When you see tons of sufficient conditions, just focus on the ones that are most important. How do you know they're important? They can be argued or contested (I think).
The first 2 listed arent as important. 3 and 4 are important so just focus on those. Prioritize the important sufficient conditions and set aside the not-so-important ones.
Did i get it right or miss anything?
I think it's the opposite. they cannot be argued or contested.
i wish they would start implementing actual LSAT questions so we can see the technique applied. All these techniques and I am so confused when the time comes to apply them to legitimate LSAT questions
@ps939 There are a few spread throughout this module -- we'll be adding about 5-6 more.
https://7sage.com/lessons/foundations/conditional-and-set-logic/intro-youtry-1-pt123-s3-q22
https://7sage.com/lessons/foundations/conditional-and-set-logic/conditional-youtry-1-pt111-s3-q18
https://7sage.com/lessons/foundations/conditional-and-set-logic/drill-pt124-s3-q19-pt110-s2-q23-pt112-s1-q14
https://7sage.com/lessons/foundations/conditional-and-set-logic/conditional-youtry-2-pt142-s1-q10
@ps939 Thank you for these! I have completed these but appreciate you putting more!
Am i the only one confused by this?
DOMAIN EXPANSION on the LSAT??
@Seattleite
@benfikhman the first thing that came to my mind lololllll
#feedback put this section immediately next to a complex, logical reasoning test question with a walk through video. This section appears too early in my opinion without an LSAT test question example to apply this in immediately after (or before). Also with a video explanation like in the sections ahead.
I would agree
Feedback noted, thank you!
Trick: Kick into the Domain
Step 1: Put the “obvious/background” stuff into the domain (context we don’t have to keep repeating).
Domain = NYC residents in 10+ unit buildings.
Step 2: Focus the actual rule only on what matters.
Rule = If OpNo ∧ 3+Ms → Right.
ngl i am so lost
SO! The Domain is the main character?
#feedback for the last few lessons, the speed of JY's speech has intermittently gone full force, approximately 9000 times the normal speed.
agreed
right
@eas1018 yeah if the words weren't on screen, I'd have no idea what he was saying
my brain refuses to under stand this. sorry
@mahi0615 essentially all this lesson is saying is if necessary, ignore sufficient conditions that aren’t relevant. But this is a double edge sword because like what the lesson showed, you could have a question that talks about “London” yada yada. And that should clue you in that you’re in NYC. Honestly this lesson is counterproductive. Ignore conditions but not ignore conditions? That just takes more brain cycles to track overall.
Sometimes you have to activate your domain expansion.
Domain Expansion: Infinite Conditional Chains
I dont know if the video was just long or what but I feel like this confused the crap out of me just now
looks like a chemistry equation lol
This is how I'd apply it to a recent article I just read.
Mikie Sherrill announced that 770 tickets to World Cup matches in MetLife Stadium will be given to NJ residents. Of that number, they have set several qualifiers for ticket distribution (I'd list them all here, but it'd be way too long).
However, for simplicity, let's say 500 were going towards military, 200 for healthcare, and 70 for supporters of small businesses. These are all sufficient conditions (In the military -> Qualify for Ticket, in healthcare -> Qualify for Ticket, etc).
Being a NJ resident is also a sufficient condition, but obviously the governor of NJ is not going to offer free tickets to MetLife Stadium to New Yorkers or Texans. So, we would "kick it up to the domain" because we'd expect that condition to be satisfied.
@DevanshiPatel good example!
This strategy has been so helpful in better understanding complex argument structures! No other LSAT course that I have taken has provided this approach.
I’m a little confused.
I could be wrong, but I am assuming that what the domain is, is a way for you to focus on the argument that matters the most. In the example that was used, there are four sufficient conditions that trigger the necessary condition. NYC was put up in the domain, because for the rule to apply, it has to be assumed that the person lives in New York. When you put it all together, it is just a way to compartmentalize and focus on the sufficient conditions that truly matters and make things a bit more easier!
maybe it'll come together later? 😅😂
You know what? It really did for me lol. When I first went through this I was like...wtf is going on here???? I skipped forward to LG then back to the LR lessons before taking the LSAT. I restarted the section on Conditional and Set Theory from scratch a month later and everything just clicked. Including this lesson today. So there is hope, I promise!
That's right!
i wish they gave us answer choices for this question so we could see how the answer messes with the rule but not the domain
Bookmarking this one. Hot diggity dang will this be useful to boil down a stimulus but it'll take time to master
yassssss
Good luck babe
Not Chappell studying for the lsattttt lol
She's hot to go for this test
o...m...g.. ive paused it, ive come back, ive rewinded, ive played 3 times, i opend my laptop 15 minutes ago after killing some questions, i do not for the life of me understand this
@KennedyLuther maybe because it looks like a math problem when turned into Lawgic and immediately am turned off lol