One of my biggest concerns with this and other sections is over-confidence and under-preparation. Based on the lessons learned over the course of the foundations learning block, as well as the lessons in this section, I have been able to intuitively understand the questions and do relatively well. However, I do not map anything out on paper, instead opting to work out the answers in my head. This has worked for now as the questions presented are designed to gradually increase in difficulty, but I am worried that my lack of mapping will be a disadvantage on the actual test. Reading this review lesson and watching the instructor map out each question makes me question whether my way is the most efficient. This style is just not intuitive, but I wonder if it is worth adopting it even if it means delaying my progress. For the time being, I am grasping these questions well, and I also understand quickly when and why I answer a question incorrectly. This, at the very least, brings me some sort of comfort. I am not sure what I want to communicate with this post, I suppose I am thinking out loud. Please let me know if anyone shares these concerns!
@clarktoo I am on the same wavelength as you. What I found to be beneficial as an alternative to mapping is just highlighting. I leave context and irrelevant information blank, highlight indicators one color, conditions in another, and premises/conclusions with another (depends on the question type).
@clarktoo I totally get where you're coming from here. As someone who has already taken the LSAT once, let me explain my approach for the second time around.
During the early stages, I've been methodical and exacting with mapping out stims that I don't understand on the first pass. By mapping, I mean getting out pen and paper and using the skills we've cultivated thus far in the course. As I've started to get better at reading stims and go hunting (where possible) I opt to avoid mapping because sometimes it's just not needed. Eventually, I anticipate that mapping will be necessary only for questions that are really stumping me. Most because we can't map every single question on test day - you simply will not have the time to do so.
What I want emphasize is that your intuitions are good. If you're getting answers correct, you're within time, and you understand when you get answers incorrect, that's exactly the sweet spot to live in. If you've put in the work to understand and perfect the skills we're building, you should trust them.
J.Y. takes the time to map these questions out to help those who are struggling and to clarify where we may have gone astray. The LSAT is timed and you will need to dispense with some mapping in the interest of expediency. If you're putting in the time to perfect the fundamentals, you can trust yourself when it's crunch time.
Happy studying, and don't get discouraged. YOU CAN DO IT!
@B_Freeze2631 I needed to hear this, thank you for the feedback, advice and words of encouragement! Apologies to anyone if my initial post read too negatively, it was written in a fit of mild frustration, but let's all get into a positive mindset about this exam!
@clarktoo that's the spirit. In my experience, mastering the mindset is just as important as mastering the skills. It's okay to trust yourself when you've put in the work. I believe in you!
Um it's kinda difficult on my end to understand what this means although i got most questions in this section right. Can anyone "translate" what they mean? Esp what does it mean by there aren't others??? Conditional logic baits Stating a necessary condition doesn't mean there aren't others. Stating a sufficient condition doesn't mean there aren't others.
SOS: I am having a really hard time with this section. I feel like I have done well with all other types of questions up until now and I do not want this to hinder the rest of my review. Any tips or tricks for this section would be sooooo so helpful. Thanks:)
@MorganDesroches try watching Kevin Lin's youtube videos to supplement your studying for these modules. sometimes we need to see more than one way of thinking to have that "aha" moment
i really really appreciate these review lessons, but are they like entirely daunting sometimes to anyone else lol like wow this is so much to learn and remember... and this is just one of MANY question types.
@moonydidit YESS, I think like this every day while I learn Lol. I'm just like, wow... how the hell are people answering these questions in less than 2 minutes?!
Hi Katie! The concept behind both of these is very simiar, and a very important one, so it's good that you asked! Understanding this will help you greatly in many questions that include any sort of causal logic.
"Identifying a causal factor doesn't preclude other causal factors."
I could say that "if it is raining it will cause the street to be wet." This statement only means what I said and nothing else. The street could also be caused to be wet because I turned on the sprinkler, or because a flood happened, or because I went on a walk and cried on the street because of how difficult the lsat is. But then, the street isn't the only thing that will be caused to be wet. The roof will be covered in water, so will the tree, and so on. None of that is true or not true based one what I said, it is irrelevant. There are many causes and effects in the world, and each thing probably has a complex system of causes and effects, so when make a rule such as "If A then B," we are not deleting all the other causal relations that A and B have respectively. Rather we are just identifying one among many.
"Identifying a causal pathway doesn’t preclude other causal pathways."
Here is a pretend causal pathway. "If it is raining, the street is wet. If the street is wet, I will hydroplane while driving. If I hydroplane I will lose control. If I lose control I will get in a car wreck." This causal pathway must occur because I made it into a premise/rule, and we don't question premises. However, I could still get in a car wreck just because I was looking at my phone, or because my breaks went out. This isn't the only causal pathway to a car wreck, there are many others. This is a fallacy that will appear many times in the test so keep an eye out for it.
I'm using this excerpt from Profits of Downtown Business
a sufficiency-necessity relationship: X guarantees Y. How do we translate this? Is it “X → Y” or “Y → X”? It’s the former; X → Y. If X happens, then Y is definitely going to happen as well. X guarantees Y, not Y guarantees X.
I think this is what JY is trying to explain. I could be wrong though.
Actually, I feel like the above comment is describing a mistaken reversal, which is a flaw where you are not allowed to reverse the relationship. To explain things further, I wrote an example of a conditional relationship below: If you purchase a macbook online from the Apple website, you will receive the laptop in the mail a few days later.
The diagram would read:
purchase a macbook online --> will receive the laptop in mail
Now let's reverse this so that it is a mistaken reversal: If you receive a laptop in the mail in a few days, you have purchased a macbook online. Clearly, this is untrue, as you could have just as well purchased a laptop from Dell or some other brand. This is why it is called a mistaken reversal.
However, receiving the laptop in the mail does not have to be the only necessary condition of purchasing a macbook online. For example, you could also claim that another potential necessary condition is that the laptop charger must also arrive in the mail when you receive the package (otherwise how would you use the macbook?!). Therefore, receiving the laptop in the mail is not the ONLY necessary condition to the sufficient condition of purchasing a macbook online. In terms of how this relates to the test, let's imagine an example question that asks for an answer that must be true. If the answer choice stated something like the ONLY thing you will receive when purchasing a macbook will be the laptop in the mail in a few days, then I believe the answer would be incorrect, since there are also other things (like the charger) that you could receive in the mail as a result of purchasing the macbook. I believe a similar kind of explanation should exist to explain the other relationship as well: that there may also be other sufficient conditions. Honestly, I was also tripped up and confused by what he meant by this, but this is what I concluded after rationalizing it out. After writing all of this though, I could also just end up completely wrong haha but I hope this was helpful!
What do you guys think: if I feel that I haven't mastered MBT questions, is it best to move on and continue the program while still practicing MBT on the side? Or is it best to focus solely on MBT until I feel comfortable moving on? #help
I would personally keep going through the program and do a drill set every day of MBT questions. There might be things in future lessons that help you get better at MBT questions.
POE is so effective for me in MBT. There are obviously 4 answer choices that are wrong, but eliminating answers that are outright ridiculous is so helpful in narrowing down the most plausible answer choices.
For almost all these questions, I was able to get the correct answer timed by doing it intuitively, process of elimination and maybe some guessing. I always thought my intuition was not that great for LSAT but I am pleasantly surprised that I do better when I am just trying to follow my intuition instead of applying the theory.
I like that JY mentioned the importance of being pragmatic. I am wondering if learning the theory will actually help to become more pragmatic? Because part of me feels that focusing on the theory messes up with just intuitively doing it.
I felt the same with this lesson set. My timing was significantly worse and I ended up confusing myself when trying to parse out notations. Using my intuition I was able to work through questions faster and with better accuracy.
Notations from what I understand are meant to be used in review to help you better understand logical processes that you should eventually be able to do mentally
You will not have enough time if you are trying to write notations for every single problem in LR, have to learn to do them mentally!
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Hold on there, you need to slow down.
We love that you want post in our discussion forum! Just come back in a bit to post again!
Subscribers can learn all the LSAT secrets.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.
38 comments
good luck everyone!
We got this everyone!
One of my biggest concerns with this and other sections is over-confidence and under-preparation. Based on the lessons learned over the course of the foundations learning block, as well as the lessons in this section, I have been able to intuitively understand the questions and do relatively well. However, I do not map anything out on paper, instead opting to work out the answers in my head. This has worked for now as the questions presented are designed to gradually increase in difficulty, but I am worried that my lack of mapping will be a disadvantage on the actual test. Reading this review lesson and watching the instructor map out each question makes me question whether my way is the most efficient. This style is just not intuitive, but I wonder if it is worth adopting it even if it means delaying my progress. For the time being, I am grasping these questions well, and I also understand quickly when and why I answer a question incorrectly. This, at the very least, brings me some sort of comfort. I am not sure what I want to communicate with this post, I suppose I am thinking out loud. Please let me know if anyone shares these concerns!
@clarktoo I am on the same wavelength as you. What I found to be beneficial as an alternative to mapping is just highlighting. I leave context and irrelevant information blank, highlight indicators one color, conditions in another, and premises/conclusions with another (depends on the question type).
@clarktoo Did you ever find a solution, I feel the same exact way
@clarktoo I totally get where you're coming from here. As someone who has already taken the LSAT once, let me explain my approach for the second time around.
During the early stages, I've been methodical and exacting with mapping out stims that I don't understand on the first pass. By mapping, I mean getting out pen and paper and using the skills we've cultivated thus far in the course. As I've started to get better at reading stims and go hunting (where possible) I opt to avoid mapping because sometimes it's just not needed. Eventually, I anticipate that mapping will be necessary only for questions that are really stumping me. Most because we can't map every single question on test day - you simply will not have the time to do so.
What I want emphasize is that your intuitions are good. If you're getting answers correct, you're within time, and you understand when you get answers incorrect, that's exactly the sweet spot to live in. If you've put in the work to understand and perfect the skills we're building, you should trust them.
J.Y. takes the time to map these questions out to help those who are struggling and to clarify where we may have gone astray. The LSAT is timed and you will need to dispense with some mapping in the interest of expediency. If you're putting in the time to perfect the fundamentals, you can trust yourself when it's crunch time.
Happy studying, and don't get discouraged. YOU CAN DO IT!
@B_Freeze2631 I needed to hear this, thank you for the feedback, advice and words of encouragement! Apologies to anyone if my initial post read too negatively, it was written in a fit of mild frustration, but let's all get into a positive mindset about this exam!
@clarktoo that's the spirit. In my experience, mastering the mindset is just as important as mastering the skills. It's okay to trust yourself when you've put in the work. I believe in you!
Um it's kinda difficult on my end to understand what this means although i got most questions in this section right. Can anyone "translate" what they mean? Esp what does it mean by there aren't others??? Conditional logic baits Stating a necessary condition doesn't mean there aren't others. Stating a sufficient condition doesn't mean there aren't others.
Kicking it Up to the Domain has helped me a lot in cutting out the noise in these complex conditional stimuli. A very practical effective strategy.
This is bi-far the easiest one so far that ican feel the impending doom of how hard it will get later on
SOS: I am having a really hard time with this section. I feel like I have done well with all other types of questions up until now and I do not want this to hinder the rest of my review. Any tips or tricks for this section would be sooooo so helpful. Thanks:)
@MorganDesroches try watching Kevin Lin's youtube videos to supplement your studying for these modules. sometimes we need to see more than one way of thinking to have that "aha" moment
i really really appreciate these review lessons, but are they like entirely daunting sometimes to anyone else lol like wow this is so much to learn and remember... and this is just one of MANY question types.
@moonydidit ya this one was particularly scary lol
@moonydidit YESS, I think like this every day while I learn Lol. I'm just like, wow... how the hell are people answering these questions in less than 2 minutes?!
@Shannell_E'llan THIS!!!
This review lesson is worth its weight in gold. We will master this stuff gang
Can someone please help me understand: Identifying a causal factor doesn't preclude other causal factors.
Identifying a causal pathway doesn't preclude other causal pathways.
This makes a lot of sense, thanks for the explanation!
Hi Katie! The concept behind both of these is very simiar, and a very important one, so it's good that you asked! Understanding this will help you greatly in many questions that include any sort of causal logic.
"Identifying a causal factor doesn't preclude other causal factors."
I could say that "if it is raining it will cause the street to be wet." This statement only means what I said and nothing else. The street could also be caused to be wet because I turned on the sprinkler, or because a flood happened, or because I went on a walk and cried on the street because of how difficult the lsat is. But then, the street isn't the only thing that will be caused to be wet. The roof will be covered in water, so will the tree, and so on. None of that is true or not true based one what I said, it is irrelevant. There are many causes and effects in the world, and each thing probably has a complex system of causes and effects, so when make a rule such as "If A then B," we are not deleting all the other causal relations that A and B have respectively. Rather we are just identifying one among many.
"Identifying a causal pathway doesn’t preclude other causal pathways."
Here is a pretend causal pathway. "If it is raining, the street is wet. If the street is wet, I will hydroplane while driving. If I hydroplane I will lose control. If I lose control I will get in a car wreck." This causal pathway must occur because I made it into a premise/rule, and we don't question premises. However, I could still get in a car wreck just because I was looking at my phone, or because my breaks went out. This isn't the only causal pathway to a car wreck, there are many others. This is a fallacy that will appear many times in the test so keep an eye out for it.
Hope this helps, best of luck!!
@aldertree00644 Thank you, good friend--very good explanation!
Inf and MBT
Patterns in the stimulus
- Review Formal/Casual logic
- Chain ideas to make inferences
- Kick ideas up into the domain
- Keep track of the sets and be careful about sliding across superset and subset
- New terms / Unfamiliar concept -> translate
- Info. might not be presented in the intuitive order, so piecing it together
- Translating into logical notation is a tool—don't force it if you don't need it
- Understand grammar thoroughly
Patterns in wrong answers
- Sufficient/necessity confusion
- Stating a necessary condition doesn't mean there aren't others.
- Stating a sufficient condition doesn't mean there aren't others
- Keep the distinction clear between the rule itself
- Causal logic baits
- Identifying a causal factor doesn't preclude other causal factors.
- Identifying a causal pathway doesn't preclude other causal pathways.
Patterns in the right answers
- Contrapositive/logically equivalent formulations
- Right answers are often predictable
- Be pragmatic: ideal answers are often not the most ideal
My most imp wrong answer type
- Bringing info from outside the stimulus
- Predictions (of the future) and Making Assumptions
so for the Patterns in wrong answers
Conditional logic baits:
Stating a necessary condition doesn't mean there aren't others.
what does this mean? like confusing them? idk i think the wording tripped me up.
Hello SashaSevy,
I'm using this excerpt from Profits of Downtown Business
a sufficiency-necessity relationship: X guarantees Y. How do we translate this? Is it “X → Y” or “Y → X”? It’s the former; X → Y. If X happens, then Y is definitely going to happen as well. X guarantees Y, not Y guarantees X.
I think this is what JY is trying to explain. I could be wrong though.
Ahh I see thank you!
Hi SashaSevy,
Actually, I feel like the above comment is describing a mistaken reversal, which is a flaw where you are not allowed to reverse the relationship. To explain things further, I wrote an example of a conditional relationship below: If you purchase a macbook online from the Apple website, you will receive the laptop in the mail a few days later.
The diagram would read:
purchase a macbook online --> will receive the laptop in mail
Now let's reverse this so that it is a mistaken reversal: If you receive a laptop in the mail in a few days, you have purchased a macbook online. Clearly, this is untrue, as you could have just as well purchased a laptop from Dell or some other brand. This is why it is called a mistaken reversal.
However, receiving the laptop in the mail does not have to be the only necessary condition of purchasing a macbook online. For example, you could also claim that another potential necessary condition is that the laptop charger must also arrive in the mail when you receive the package (otherwise how would you use the macbook?!). Therefore, receiving the laptop in the mail is not the ONLY necessary condition to the sufficient condition of purchasing a macbook online. In terms of how this relates to the test, let's imagine an example question that asks for an answer that must be true. If the answer choice stated something like the ONLY thing you will receive when purchasing a macbook will be the laptop in the mail in a few days, then I believe the answer would be incorrect, since there are also other things (like the charger) that you could receive in the mail as a result of purchasing the macbook. I believe a similar kind of explanation should exist to explain the other relationship as well: that there may also be other sufficient conditions. Honestly, I was also tripped up and confused by what he meant by this, but this is what I concluded after rationalizing it out. After writing all of this though, I could also just end up completely wrong haha but I hope this was helpful!
Thank you sooo much! yes this fs helped!
What do you guys think: if I feel that I haven't mastered MBT questions, is it best to move on and continue the program while still practicing MBT on the side? Or is it best to focus solely on MBT until I feel comfortable moving on? #help
I would personally keep going through the program and do a drill set every day of MBT questions. There might be things in future lessons that help you get better at MBT questions.
@psteph29Good advice!
This review page is awesome.
POE is so effective for me in MBT. There are obviously 4 answer choices that are wrong, but eliminating answers that are outright ridiculous is so helpful in narrowing down the most plausible answer choices.
#help
For almost all these questions, I was able to get the correct answer timed by doing it intuitively, process of elimination and maybe some guessing. I always thought my intuition was not that great for LSAT but I am pleasantly surprised that I do better when I am just trying to follow my intuition instead of applying the theory.
I like that JY mentioned the importance of being pragmatic. I am wondering if learning the theory will actually help to become more pragmatic? Because part of me feels that focusing on the theory messes up with just intuitively doing it.
I felt the same with this lesson set. My timing was significantly worse and I ended up confusing myself when trying to parse out notations. Using my intuition I was able to work through questions faster and with better accuracy.
Notations from what I understand are meant to be used in review to help you better understand logical processes that you should eventually be able to do mentally
You will not have enough time if you are trying to write notations for every single problem in LR, have to learn to do them mentally!
Yes, 100% correct!