Hi everyone,

This seems like it's a relatively easy question but I cannot understand why answer choice (b) is right over answer choice (a). Doesn't answer choice (b) strengthen the argument since Salmonella is has to be quickly identified and treated and new test detects Salmonella at levels that are low to pose a health risk to people?

Please share your wisdom!

Thank you!

can someone help? I don't see a distinction between both levels of oxygen

does anyone know why the answer is E? ' In the absence of a threat to anyone's health or safety??

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question"

where can I find this lesson in core curriculum?

anticipated right answer but still got it wrong :(

Premise: there have been no nuclear wars

Conclusion: nuclear deterrence has worked

I thought there might be an alternative explanation for there not being any nuclear war so I thought A provided that answer. If nukes were expensive wouldn’t that provide an alternative explanation for why there isn’t nuclear war?

Admin Note: Edited the title. Please use the format "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of question"

Best of luck to all of us, we're gonna do great!

Does anyone else have the issue of no slots showing up? I've gone through every hour in the rang, and no options show up.

Started off with a -7 reading comp on my diagnostic and now I'm down to the 0 to (-2) on recent PTs with very little variability based on the section's difficulty. Thought I'd share what works for me.

The RC section is famously the least 'learnable' LSAT section, especially relative to the LG section. Even being good at RC, being thrown into a section feels a lot more shaky then starting a new never before encountered LG section. There is a feeling in LG that you have a reliable and consistent procedure that you can use to get the right answers, and the absence of a similarly clearly defined and reliable procedure for RC is easily felt and has shaken my confidence in attacking a RC section before.

I present for your consideration the VIQW (Vick-double-"u") method.

Visualize

Interest

Question

Write

This was largely adapted from the method outlined in the course sections on RC, with some additions of my own.

Visualizing helps occupy the mind while reading in a way that helps retain attention and focus on written details. Visualize here could be replaced with something like Imagination + Context. For example if I'm reading the passage discussing the merits of IP law protections for software to stop people stealing video game code I might pause briefly to imagine a scenario in my mind where I download a game that is clearly just a reskinned version of Minecraft with the same codebase directly ripped from it. Or in a passage on prescriptivist vs descriptivist grammarians I might play a little imaginative game in the background where I try to picture in my head what I think a prescriptivist would look like versus a descriptivist based on details in the passage. Maybe I'm crazy for this one, but this strategy really helps keep my mind engaged in the background in a way that creates additional interest in the material, and therefore helps with recall and drawing connections between different details in the text.

Interest is in my opinion, key to RC success. If you are not in the top 1% of intellectual curiosity and not innately gifted at RC, then your success in this section will depend on you becoming a master salesperson. I strongly believe that if you can answer this question "Why do I want to know about what this passage is speaking on?" in the affirmative honestly, this can make a huge difference. If you accept the proposition that you don't care what these passages say for the most part, that they suck and you just have to grin and bear it until you can start answering questions and be done with this section, you are 100% shooting yourself in the foot. You need to think about the things you think are worth considering and learning about, then figure out a way to quickly draw a connection between the passage and your interests and be able to give a one-two sentence answer for why what this passage has to say matters and is worth paying attention to--other than to just get you a good score.

The third pillar is Questioning. Ideally ask questions as you are going through the text. Did the author just make a claim--why are they making it--is it something they are trying to persuade us of, or is it being presented as a generally accepted fact that they are using to support some other claim they have made. At the very least each paragraph you should pause and ask yourself: "what is a question that is answered or attempted to be answered in this paragraph?" This will help contextualize the text, help you with main point and other question types, as well as with recall.

The last pillar is something I learned about LG recently which led me to go from -6 to -9 range to a consistent 0 to -3 range. The point of the methods you use in LG, such as rule translation and diagramming is to allow you to distribute the cognitive load of thinking through LG problems. The LG games method and procedure is actually a manually operated analog computer that you use to reduce the amount of computations you have to make in your head at the same time, and to reduce the amount of information you store in your head at the same time. Think of it like this--if your RAM maxes out your computer, its CPU slows down--in other words when its short term memory is full is becomes slower at computing information, slowing down your performance. What you write down in an LG game reduces the amount of information you need to have concurrently and readily accessible in your short term memory at any given moment, and gives you a way to solve for some problems through writing out scenarios on gameboards--reducing the amount of stress on your internal mental processing and improving the quality of what you are computing in your head.

So long story short, I think this same logic can apply to RC. So I recommend getting scrap paper and writing jot notes per paragraph. Every time you read a line and it interests you write out a short jot note (no more than 5 words) that will remind you of that thought when you look at it again in a minute. Likewise when you notice a claim that seems like a conclusion of an argument the author is making, or a claim that answers some question raised earlier in the passage make a short jot. Writing helps improve recall, that's a given. But my shot in the dark is that this actually helps you think through the material as you read it as well.

Sorry for the wall of text, just wanted to write a post that would have helped me if I saw it a few months back. Best of luck to everyone, especially fellow January LSAT writers! We can do this :)

Anyone know why A is correct? I chose E

I can't parse out or understand the assumption being made in this question below:

Paleontologist: It is widely, but falsely, held that life began in the ocean and did not exist on land until half a billion years ago.

The answer is D but I do not understand why

Admin Note: Deleted the question and answer choices because it is against our Forum Rules to post the entire question and answer choices on the forum.

Want to make sure I'm thinking through this correctly. C is right because it suggests the incorrectness of a premise, that the reason that Peter's actions are more blameworthy than Alicia's. The relevant part of C is just that Peter's running a red light, an illegal action, caused the action that caught the police's attention. I'm struggling to figure out whether the part of C that says that Alicia took extra care to avoid police noticing her contradicts the premise that there's a diff in the blameworthiness. I would argue that it doesn't, but I want to ensure that I've nailed down the important part of the correct answer choice.

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

Hi, I've been on a hiatus for a few months and came across a problem while reviewing NA questions on the syllabus and remember having this issue in the past as well.

https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/computer-emotions-na-question/?ss_completed_lesson=1791

Here JY attaches a noun (computer) to another noun (emotions) instead of writing it as, and as I wrote it, C->/E he writes it as /Ec

Then he wrote the conclusion as follows /Ic, I wrote it as C-> /I

So how can I know when to attach one thing to another in conditional reasoning? Is there a general rule to this? Because it lead me to the following issue with this problem.

I created a chain where both E and I connect to /C however I'm not able to see which comes first inorder to validate the conclusion, the /E or the /I

(diagramed below)

P:C - > /E

SA: I->E or E->I

C - >/I

JY, and the correct answer choice, both did it as I->E - I understand how they got to that when he attaches the c to /E.

Im not sure if my conditionality is off or what, but I would have assumed that it wouldn't matter if I attached the two nouns together or just created it the relationship in the chain as above. If anyone needs more clarification on anything please let me know.

Hey guys,

Sorry if this seems a bit naive but I'm hoping there's a bit of 'secret sauce' to help me get over this plateau I've hit.

I'm taking the January LSAT and have been batting around -4 to -6 on the logic games (diagnostic was -14 score 155) and I'm looking to make the final push to try and consistently keep it to -0. When I do sections untimed I'm able to get 100% without breaking too much of a sweat but I'm over time more often than not. I haven't left questions unanswered but I have noticed that roughly 50% of the time I do have a time crunch when answering the final two questions.

For the games themselves I do get a useful and inference rich diagram complete but I do notice that sometimes I get tripped up on rules and that adds a bit of time to completing the diagram (usually no more than 3 minutes).

I've moved over here from Khan Academy. I'm gunning for 170+ but the last 5 practice tests I've taken have averaged around 164 with my lowest at 162 and highest currently sitting at 167. My LR scores have quite a bit of variance from -2 to -7 and my RC scores fluctuate from -5 to -3.

I'm drilling the specific question types I'm getting wrong on LR hoping to get the last bits to 'click' and hopefully keep that to -3 consistently. What's left is logic games which from my understanding have the highest ROI for the effort invested.

Any advice/feedback is appreciated!

A corporation is planning separate travel itineraries for two representatives, Frank and Gloria...

Please #help

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format "PT#.S#.Q# (G#) - brief description of question." I also removed the Question and Answer Choices as it is against our Forum Rules to post full LSAT questions on the forum.

Also, here is the official explanation:

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-93-section-4-game-1/

Where in the stimulus do we find support for the fact that zebra mussels MUST be regarded as hazardous waste if they don't transform the waste products they filter and remove? Answer choices D and E seem really close here.

Admin Note: Please use the format "PT#.S#.Q# (G#) - brief description of question."

why is it A (avoids the issue instead by instead focusing on supporters of proposal) instead of C (fails to define the critical term “satisfied?” Like why? I don't understand?

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

Hi everyone,

I'd like to share a RC strategy that's been working for me.

PLEASE DO NOT SHARE THIS INFORMATION WITH OTHER SITES/ COMMUNITIES.

I'm just trying to give back to this community that has given me much.

Quick note about me:

When I first began the LSAT prep, I didn't think that I needed to focus on RC much, due to my arrogance.I majored in Political Science (Political Theory) and got a master's degree in humanities. I'm very used to critically reading and analyzing dense, complex materials. I also happened to get a perfect score on GRE verbal. I didn't have much trouble with the GRE RC passages, so I thought that my experience would be the same for the LSAT passages.

I was wrong.

When I first timed myself, I realized that I go over 10 min easily per passage, with 1+ wrong. I'd be missing on average 5 questions wrong per section, way over the allotted time. Since then, I have been studying and researching various RC strategies to help me, such as Nicole's webinar, Corey's active reading webinar and @"Cant Get Right" 's, (they were also super duper helpful. I really highly recommend watching them), some discussion postings from here (the posting from @theforms is also very helpful) , some from TSL, Mike Kim's trainer, etc.

After synthesizing my own strategy and using it, I am now consistently 2~3 min under with 0-2 wrong per section.

Here's my synthesized strategy from the various resources above.

Success to RC = a seamless integration of 1. active reading + 2.reading for structure.

My strategy is on how to INTEGRATE the two. I'm not going to go into details on explaining what is each, because there are many resources out there already.

Before I go over my strategy, I will still briefly mention what active reading and reading for structure are.

What is an active reading? It is engaging with the reading as if one is having a dialogue. Think of it as active listening; it is about being totally present, but mindfully detached. We all know some of the crucial techniques to actively read well. Below are the especially effective techniques for me.

Here's an example sentence. "LSAT passages are like paper tigers: they appear to be formidable at first, but get easier over time."

When you encounter the sentence, think about what question would prompt the above sentence as an answer. My question would be, "how difficult are the LSAT passages?" Here, it helps you to articulate the essence of the sentence: It is about the difficulty of the LSAT passages.

Reading for structure

Like I said, I won't get into the details of reading for structure.

Now here's the crucial integration piece I'd like to share with you- how active reading and reading for structure integrate and feed off from one another.

The key is to

Step 1. find the central theme (the key subject matter that forms a basis for an argument, hypothesis, claim, finding, problem) in the opening paragraph and treat each sentence as revealing the aspects of that central theme. Compile the aspects of the central theme as you are reading, and add them on to the central theme. This is pretty abstruse, so I will use an example (PT 32 Passage 4 opening paragraph) to explain.

sentence 1: something about wine. - (hold this in thought as you are reading. Something about wine is the central theme)

sentence 2: wine - distinct. (Here's an aspect of the central theme, wine: it is distinct. try to utilize the active reading techniques mentioned above. What question would the sentence be answering?

sentence 3: wine- distinct b/c of health benefits (there's another aspect. It is distinct. Why? Because it has health benefits)

sentence 4: wine- distinct health benefits- obscured by the scientists.

Do you see what I am doing? I am simply adding on and connecting the previous information to the new information. Going from simply "wine," the central theme as revealed by sentence 1, I now have a more clear picture about this central theme and its aspects by sentence 4.

The paragraph ends here. What do I have now in sentence 4, the last sentence?

The scientists (who? go back to sentence 1) have obscured the healthful benefits of wine that other alcoholic beverages do not have.

Step 2. Find the structure.

What does this compilation of the central theme + its aspects signify? What does it mean? Why did the author write this?

Simply try to articulate using this mantra, "the author is trying to..." with the compilation that you have at the end of the paragraph.

The author is trying to... 1. suggest that wine has a health benefit that other alcoholic beverages do not have (this is the author's position) 2. counter "the scientists."

So think of having 2 mental columns as you are reading.

The left column: find a central theme--> find the essential aspects of this theme in each subsequent sentence and add on to the central theme found. (like what I did above. wine-> wine is distinct -> wine is distinct in x way -> wine is distinct for x way but that distinction has been obscured by Y)

The right column: after each paragraph, think about the final compilation in the left column and simply ask, "why did the author write this?" Why did the author write that "wine is distinct for x way but t hat distinction has been obscured by Y?" The answer to this question = the purpose of each paragraph.

Repeat this for each paragraph.

Using this strategy, I read the passage in about 4:15 min and answered the questions in 4 min. Total: 8:15 and 30 seconds under the allotted time / passage.

Anyone have any tricky LR problems involving conditional logic that they've encountered and could share? Either individual problems or a list, if you by some incredible stroke of good fortune, you should have one, would be great.

Also, if anyone is interested in syncing up to work on some tougher conditional logic problems please reach out.

Hi! I really struggled with timing on LSAT prep test 93 Logic Game Three because of the amount of conditional statements and not knowing where to even start with inferences beyond contrapositives. Any suggestions with where to find resources on the best way to set up game three / similar games? There is not a video explanation up on 7Sage yet. Thanks!

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format "PT#.S#.Q# (G#) - brief description of question."

https://classic.7sage.com/event/pt93-lr-review-j-y-ping-4/

I ended up changing my answer from C to A during blind review, but cannot figure out why C is wrong.

Admin Note: Please use the format "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of question."

Hi! Does anyone know the difference between, "the author overlooks the possibility" vs "takes for granted that" and how can I differentiate it when looking at an argument? Thanks!

Can you please #help explain the reasoning behind the right answer choice and why the wrong ones are wrong?

I got it right due to process of elimination but Why are sea turtles able to sense the magnetic field?

Why is c) correct?

b) seems like the right answer to me.

Can someone please explain.

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of question"