@KayleeMurray They're probably referring to the fact that, throughout the curriculum, whenever there was a video explanation for a problem, there was usually a summary of the premises and conclusion, understood as P -> C (premise leads to conclusion), as the most specific form of whatever rule you would be looking for in the answer choices.
@mszchloechen640 read it for familiarity and connection but don't try to remember everything or you'll stress yourself out even more (don't overthink the LSAT--Just Do It, Shia)
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.
15 comments
Are you allowed to take the contra positive of a rule, or not?
For example, if the rule is:
"if there is a rain storm, the hotel must provide umbrellas to its guests"
are you allowed to say that:
"if the hotel is not required to give an umbrella to its guests, it is not raining"
Or do situations like that simply not arise in these question types?
@EmmaDjukic So from the lesson examples and You Trys in this section, seems like we cannot!
goodbye to this section
@VanillaCat nevermind there's a drill
@VanillaCat laughing out loud at this
@char same lol!!!
@VanillaCat LOL I feel the same
what exactly does:
Patterns in right answers P → C
mean?
@KayleeMurray They're probably referring to the fact that, throughout the curriculum, whenever there was a video explanation for a problem, there was usually a summary of the premises and conclusion, understood as P -> C (premise leads to conclusion), as the most specific form of whatever rule you would be looking for in the answer choices.
This is a great summary!
#feedback I wish more of these articles were offered in video form as well
this is depressingly long
@mszchloechen640 read it for familiarity and connection but don't try to remember everything or you'll stress yourself out even more (don't overthink the LSAT--Just Do It, Shia)
hi; what does "logical notation" exactly refer to?
It refers to the "lawgic" lessons in the core curriculum!