Hey 7Sagers!

Question for you all - what's your trick to stay motivated throughout the study process? I've had to have some surgery done about two/three weeks ago, and have been MIA on here as well as in my studying, as recovery was tough and painful.

I'm trying to get back into my study grind, but found myself lacking energy and motivation (plus being spoiled from being on pain killers and watching TV and sleeping all day... woo me).

I'm also WAY behind my study schedule now. I was planning on joining the September BR group within the next week, but now I am only about halfway through the curriculum since I've lost so much time.

Where would you guys pick up at? I'm thinking about re-reading all of my notes that I've made throughout the course of the curriculum and just trying to pick up where I left off.

I'd love to join the BR groups and really don't want to miss out, but feel as if it's probably more important just to get through the core curriculum right now?

I just found a copy of PT74 I bought from CambridgeLSAT awhile ago. It looks like it's got 5 sections, with the 3rd section labeled as (PT-A) on the Answer Key page. There is no label to indicate whether this section came from another PT.

Are there more than 4 LSAT sections? Many different test centers get different combinations? Or am I missing something here?

Hello, I was wondering may I bring a silent stop watch to the testing center? I have accommodations that give me more time and to use an analog watch or the Perfect Lsat watch wouldnt be of any use, so I was wondering if it is possible?

I feel that this question categorizes more as a MoR, or MISC, than a Flaw/Descriptive.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-35-section-4-question-07/

Although we were determining the argument’s “flaw”, we had to choose an answer choice that summarized the attorney’s flawed “Reasoning”, not its actual flaw. The correct answer choice is exceedingly different from the normal flaw a.c.

If this question wasn’t categorized under flaw drills, I think more people would have gotten this answer correctly, especially because we’ve already established a strong foundation for MoR questions.

Regardless, I should be more careful by reading the question stem more meticulously.

Pseudo-Sufficient Assumptions with Sage Jimmy Dahroug

Friday 5/13 at 8pm ET

Sage Jimmy (173) will be leading an intensive on PSA questions (sometimes called "Supporting Principle" questions). There's been a lot of buzz about this question type recently so be sure to tune in!

To join the webinar, please do the following:

Pseudo-Sufficient Assumptions with Sage Jimmy Dahroug

Fri, May 13, 2016 8:00 PM ET

Please join my meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone.

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/614923157

You can also dial in using your phone.

United States +1 (872) 240-3212

Access Code: 614-923-157

Note on all webinars: Only the live webinars are free and open to the public. No recordings will be made publicly available, but we do make webinar recordings available to 7sage's students as part of the paid course. So if you want to get some great webinar content for free, be sure to attend the live version. Furthermore, any recording or broadcasting of webinars is strictly prohibited (Periscope, screencapture, etc.) and constitutes a violation of LSAC's copyright. Copyright infringement is not a good way to start a legal career.

Hey,

So I'm taking the June LSAT. My LR score is great, LG is steadily rising, but my RC score fluctuates on a consistent basis. My plan was to take a PT from here on out, every day or at least every other day. But I really need to solidify my RC score. Any tips of advice on what to do here?

Anybody having issues getting to the webinar videos on a tablet? I can access them just fine on my phone and laptop. When on the tablet I click discussion and I'm immediately directed to the forum. I don't have enough time to select any other options from the drop down menu. When selecting categories from the righ hand side and then webinars I can only see the announcement for the webinars that were posted in the forum. I'm using a Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1. I found a link someone posted and I was able to access the videos from there. Just wondering if I can figure this out.

It seems to me that it is impossible to form a complete logical argument in which the key terms do not appear at least twice, and it also seems that every logical argument but one necessarily uses at least two terms. (The only logical argument that only uses one term is the "double negative," which states: "A," therefore "~(~A)," and I have never seen this in an LSAT stimulus.)

As far as I can tell, a complete LSAT question (by which I mean the stimulus plus the correct answer) must necessarily include at least two terms, and each of these terms must appear at least twice.

I may be failing to consider certain unusual question types that don't actually consist of logical arguments as such. If so, that might be the exception that proves the rule.

If anybody can provide an example of an argument (other than the "double negative" above) that has less than two terms, or refers to a key term only once, please let me know.

"Finding the conclusion" is as easy as riding a bicycle... and as hard, for struggling students.

I have noticed that the word "should" is as helpful as "thus" or "therefore" when it comes to finding a conclusion. Unlike the typical conclusion keywords, "should" appears in conclusions because conclusions tend to be recommendations, predictions, and judgments. (See Kaplan's list of six conclusion types for more on this.) "Should" can be used for all three of those sentence forms.

Sometimes "should" appears in a premise as well as the conclusion. This routinely happens in moral arguments (we should obey the law, the law says drive 55, therefore we should drive 55). While it is possible to use "should" in a premise but not in the conclusion, I have yet to find example of that happening in a published LSAT question.

As usual, I'm looking for criticism (constructive or otherwise) and counterexamples. This may not be a big deal for you folks who have been riding your bicycle for years, but it's a small step forward for the folks who are still on training wheels.

My logical reasoning was terrible, and I ran out of time for games. Has this happened to anyone else?

A throwaway account to stay anonymous. I want to thank @"J.Y. Ping" @"Jonathan Wang" @"Alan Cheuk" @"Dillon A. Wright" also all 7Sagers I was in touch with in the past year and a half. As an ESL person, my road was extra rough. I hated the LSAT, and I still hate it. So without all your help and encouragement, I wouldn't be where I am today.

In a year and a half, I have improved more than 20 points (yes it is doable), 138 to 162 (Feb write). So many things suffered in my life, but I did it guys :) I studied almost every day, and the road was very bumpy. I did the LSAT twice, December, where I was screwed up by the third game and February where I did better. I was the type of people who wanted -0 in games (obviously, an ESL person), so when I don't do well in games my other sections suffer. The rule was always not to let previous questions affect your upcoming ones, but I couldn't follow that :) So I didn't do well in December.

I would be lying if I say 7Sage was my only prep material, but it was the only course I took. It provided me with the foundation and the mindset. Most of my improvement was through it. I also used The Trainer, PowerScore LR, and another random book which is not one of the known ones. Trust me, I even read LSAT for Dummies. My LG was solely through 7Sage. My PowerScore LG is untouched. Frankly speaking, I even skipped LG in The Trainer.

Here is the good news. I received an admission to my top-choice school, Osgoode, in Canada, and I am beyond thrilled.

Cheers to all of you,

P.S. @"Dillon A. Wright" You have a great customer service. Thank you for freezing my account. I will message you shortly from my real account to unfreeze it and let it rest in peace :)

Hey everyone!

Here's a question that's been on my mind for quite some time. I've long been contemplating the various school's I'm going to apply to (knowing that my final LSAT score is going to be the deciding factor on this). I know everyone says to apply to a reach school in the state you want to practice, but I personally would most likely practice wherever I go to law school. I don't feel tied down anywhere, and am very much open to moving and exploring life in another area.

Now with that being said, I have a friend that is starting law school at Tulane this year. She's lived in Louisiana her whole life, and does not plan on ever moving to a different state (but never say never, right!!). Now, for people that would like to eventually move later in life (perhaps after the 5 year reciprocity period is over), what is your opinion on being a lawyer in LA? I love New Orleans (actually have family/friends there) and am interested in applying to Tulane. Since LA is a civil law state and the rest of the US are common law states, would staying and practicing law in LA actually be detrimental to a law career if you decide to move to another state later on in life?

Just something I've been very curious about.

Thanks for the thoughts

Hello,

I just begun my 7sage course. It is awesome so far however can someone tell me where they have purchased PT's 36-52? I looked a 10 pack test from Cambridge LSAT which included these tests but for $400!!

Have you guys just purchased them individually? Even for some individually I have seen them for $24 each. Please help me!

Found this interesting blog post about a logical fallacy in the witch scene of Monty Python and the Holy Grail. It focuses on an inductive argument form and a deductive form (more appropriate for LSAT). The deductive form shows a good example of the difference between truth and validity which is one of the 7sage lessons. Figured I'd share its a pretty fun way to learn the way LAWGIC works.

The scene can be found here:

Note: skip to 0:40 to the beginning of the argument

The break down and explanation can be found here:

http://www.mooneytheology.com/2012/09/logical-fallacies-in-monty-python-and.html

There were several questions in this section that seemed to provide answers that I could not seem to justify even after BRing, not sure if this type of post is an issue because of its detail on specific questions, if so I apologize in advance and please remove.

9.

The correct answer seems to require that if the people who occupied the site were using a "wider variety of wild plants than did any other people at the time", then they would have "used some plants in ways that no other people did at that time."

In my opinion, using a "wider variety" in no way implies or supports the contention that this society was utilizing previously unused/discovered plants; it would mean that this society was eating a using a wider range of plants than any other culture, but each plant they used was also being used by some other culture.

Society "X" could eat wild mushrooms, apples, pears, spinach, bananas, and pineapples; while each of these plants was also eaten by at least some other society in existence.

Thoughts?

19.

The correct answer introduces this concept of "well-being" that appears no where in the argument of the professor, how would this weaken the argument?

21.

When I did this question it seemed as if it presented 2 necessary conditions for the book to be published this year -

1. important;

2. well written.

I selected the correct answer (A) in timed, but switched to (D) in BR, because (A) seems to lack the condition of being well written.

What would be the correct logical representation for this question?

Hey y'all!

You all know how awesome those epic mind maps JY uses in the Core Curriculum are. A lot of you have asked for printable versions of those. Well, we're excited to share the first two of three mind maps with you—available to everyone, for free! These mind maps show the content of the Grammar and Argument lessons in the Core Curriculum. I've included little boxes you can star or check off as a way to keep track of your progress in a standalone, tangible form. I know I always like to print things off and put them in my binders, and I bet a lot of you are the same way :)

To download the Arguments Mind Map, click here: https://classic.7sage.com/core-curriculum-lsat-arguments-mind-map/

Preview of the first page (4 pages total):

To download the Grammar Mind Map, click here: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat-grammar-mind-map/

Please share any feedback in the comments below. We'll also be releasing a multi-page mind map Logic sections of the course, so stay tuned for that!

I've been stuck in the 166-171 range for 8 months or so now, and do retakes in the 174-176 range.

I typically miss 2-4 in LR, and 0-3 in games.

However, my RC is all over the place. There have been times where I've gone -0, and others (like most recently) where I've missed as many as 8 or 9.

I started doing the Puzzle Theory (piecing all of the answers together), and writing a brief statement summarizing each paragraph. These helped initially, but not as much anymore.

I also understand that all of the answers are in the passage, but I'm finding the answer choices so convoluted that I can't find them. With that said, I typically finish RC with a few minutes of extra time.

How do I properly review RC? What can I do to get better?

I have looked everywhere and it seems that they just do not sell these two tests anymore does anyone know if I can actually find them somewhere?

Anybody taking the test at Wagner college on Staten Island? I'm coming from Brooklyn... I think I have a ride worked out but I wouldn't mind making a back up plan with someone else. The whole no phones allowed thing really makes it hard to work out a cab or anything like that, and I am, like most of NY, sadly car-less.

Would love to hear everyone (especially top scorers) weigh in on this--

Do you ever, in the course of doing an LR/LG section [under timed conditions] find yourselves selecting an answer choice and moving on WITHOUT continuing reading the other remaining answer choices? I know the proper approach in selecting a correct answer is to both identify the correct answer, AND to decisively eliminate every single incorrect answer, but sometimes you come across the correct answer choice that you've already anticipated while assessing the stimulus, and you know it's 100% correct before reading all the other answer choices. The reason I ask about this is because after drilling so many PT's, I still struggle with finishing all the test sections on time, and that amounts to lost points. So, I wonder if it would be the right strategy to pick the right answer and move on without reading all the remaining choices, (in those few cases where I do anticipate and identify the right answer with 100% certainty) in the interest of time?

"We make it look easy on the court... because we practice until we cannot get it wrong anymore."

Gabby Williams

GET EM

With 30 days left to test day, can anyone pls give me advice on how I can best prepare myself within the next month to enter test day in the best shape possible? Talking about in terms of eating habits, sleep schedule, avoiding stress, etc. I remember there being a post about this, but I couldn't find it.

Since my first diagnostic I've done respectably on RC and LR pretty consistently, generally -0 to -4 (-2 most common result on LR, -1 most common on RC). There's absolutely room for improvement, but I feel like I'm doing respectably well.

My LG scores, on the other hand, are an absolute train wreck. I don't think I've ever made it through the entire LG section under timed conditions. Under timed conditions I generally get -10 or even worse. It's an absolute disaster.

Outside of timed conditions I can generally work my way through every game without too much brain damage. Without a timer I rarely miss any LG questions.

I've completed the curriculum. I've done most of the problem sets, I've done all of the LG from about 2/3 of the tests using @Pacifico's fool proofing method. In recent weeks I've preceded the fool proofing with a timed drill of the section and then proceeded on to fool proofing each game individually.

I'm signed up for the June test. I am consistently scoring between 164 and 167 on my PTs (blind reviews now consistently above 175). My goal would be to break 170 on test day.

At this point my calculation is that the best use of my time is increasing my efficiency on LG. I appreciate the value of PTs. I also recognize that I have room for improvement in each section. It seems, though, that further improving LR and RC would demand a great deal of time. Even if I did so, I would still only give me an outside shot at 170 given my poor LG performance.

It seems to me that LG offers the lowest hanging fruit and the greatest potential for improvement.

My tentative plan, then, is to stop doing PTs (or at least cut from two per week to one) and instead just drill the heck out of LGs.

What do you think? Is it madness to consider abandoning PTs? Should I scale back on them and beef up my LG drills? Should I carry on as I have been?

Hi, I seem to be having problems correctly identifying the conclusion in complicated LR questions. Does anyone have tips for this? Thanks!