I think I reasoned my way though this as I wrote it out. Figured I’d post it in case anyone might be helped by it. Please point out any issues.

I get that every NA is an assumption the argument actually makes. Why? bc for an argument to work, the NA must be true which entails that if the argument has a NA, the argument is obviously making that assumption. But is the inverse also true? Is every assumption the argument actually makes a NA?

My understanding is that most SAs are assumptions we impose on the argument, not ones that the argument actually makes. Sometimes the assumption the argument makes happens to also be a SA. Eg

P: A

C:B

A->B is the NA as well as SA. This seems to affirm every assumption argument actually makes is a NA.

Is it wrong to think of SAs as assumptions we impose on the argument?

Are there times an argument actually makes an assumption that isn’t necessary? I guess technically there could be an assumption within a stimulus or argument that’s unrelated or irrelevant to the conclusion’s reasoning and therefore it being false wouldn’t wreck the conclusion and isn’t needed. LSAT typically doesn’t do this though.

Okay I think I figured this out. Just bc the argument assumes something doesn’t make it a NA but every NA is something the argument assumes. So to check whether a NA Q ac is wrong, ask if the arg assumes that AC. If it doesn’t then eliminate. 8/10 times if argument does assume AC, it’s the correct ac. That’s typically what I do when I’m a bit unsure on NA Qs instead of negation test. More intuitive for me.

I have been using 7sage for over a year now and ive barely taken practice tests.

Im having trouble concentrating after the first section.

Is there any way to improve or lengthen the amount of time I can study for?

I have about a month left and im not even sure how much ive improved since I cant finish a practice test.

wanting to get into the 160s what can be done to reach that score

I've been studying for about 5 months and am taking the August LSAT. I've gone from a 156 diagnostic to solid mid-160 PTs using Mike Kim's LSAT Trainer in tandem with 7Sage explanation videos and analytics.

I recently got two scores of 168, was feeling really close to reaching my goal of 170+, but on the last two PTs I missed a lot on LR and fell back down to 165 and 163, respectively. I'm especially nervous because I had no idea that I was bombing LR and actually felt pretty confident.

Any tips for sharpening my LR in this last month push?

(I have a full-time job and am currently devoting 10-15 hours a week to studying; an expensive tutor isn't an option)

Thanks in advance!

To those who weren't good at RC in the beginning and got significantly better through practice,

I would appreciate if you could give me some advice!

I've been studying for almost 10 months now, and still scoring low in LR (not much different in RC...)

in the beginning I used to get -13 wrong and got better constantly scoring just below -10

some times I got around -5 but those sections were the ones that had 2-star difficulty...

feel like I'm spending my time and energy for nothing.

so demoralizing

I have to do a lot of catching up lol, I'm thinking the best way to study would be if other people study WITH me. Live Discord/Zoom sessions could be pretty awesome! If you're interested, here's the server: https://discord.gg/tK2P6sRd

I'm having so much difficulty with these types of problems (which argument is most similar to the structure of the paragraph), does anyone have any advice for these?

I've taken a few practice tests in the 70s, a few 80s, and some 60s. I don't have that much time left till september and obviously there are way more practice tests than I can do in time for the test (I'm studying while working full-time). Anyone know how I can figure out which PTs I should make sure I take before the test? I'm saving all the 90s for the month of August. Thank you!

Hi guys! I am looking for some people to study with for the August 2022 LSAT! Hoping to make some sort of groupme or group chat, and maybe have zooms or something! I am a little behind on my study schedule, but I am hoping to really pick up the pace. My goal is mid 170s, and I am currently scoring around 169-171. Also, I am on EST!!

Hello,

I am taking the test in August, and I am trying to get my scoring to be more consistent. My goal is a 172. Here are the results from my last 4 tests:

PT 63:

LR -1

LG -3

RC -3

PT 64:

LR -1

LG -0

RC -2

PT 65:

LR -4

LG -1

RC -4

PT 66

LR -1

LG -2

RC -4

My current plan is to take two full PTs a week and take one day a week to take a PT section by section spaced out. Does that seem like enough? Any tips for consistency? I feel like I can never do well in every section.

This question is a little complicated to parse because their are two agents in the discussion, the nation who may attack (Potential Aggressor [PA]) and the nation who may be attacked (Target). Clarifying who is who helps set up the lawgic from the stimulus.

In the stimulus you get:

PAs having Fear of Retaliation implies that PAs will hesitate to attack (PAFR -> PAHesitate)

PAFR also implies that PAs are deterred (PAFR -> DetersPAs)

You also get this, which is very unweildy:

if PA thinks Target has great retaliatory power then PA thinks it CANNOT defend itself

(PAThinkTargetHasRetaliatoryPwr -> /PAThinkCanDefend)

an inference we can make right away is:

if /PAThinkCanDefend -> PAFR

if PAs think they CANNOT defend against retaliation then PAs have a fear of retaliation

Now we apply valid argument form 3 - Transitive:

PAThinksTargetHasGreatRetaliatoryPwr -> /PAThinkCanDefend -> PAFR -> DetersPAs & PAHesitate

Is there an answer choice that leverages the first step in order to optimize the final step? D does.

D: if you want deterrence, tell everyone about your great retaliatory power (because of the lawgic from the stimulus).

A: says "DeterPAs -> /PAThinkCanDefend" which confuses the given sufficient and necessary elements

B: says "PAThinksPA(self)HasGreatRetaliatoryPwr -> DetersPAs" and the stimulus doesn't say anything about that first part

C: assumes nations always attack unless deterred, which common sense indicates is probably false (hopefully) But aside from real world knowledge, it says "if PAHesitate -> /PAThinkCanDefend" (if PA hesitates then PA thinks it can't defend against retaliation). What we can say is that SOME PAs that hesitate were deterred. This answer choice is the same as A in its error.

E: We don’t know that retaliatory force has to be GREATER, only that it has to be “so great that a potential aggressor nation would have reason to think that it could not defend itself against such retaliation.” Also, superlatives like "maximum" give me pause and seem to appear in false answer choices often.

So, I'm having a bit of trouble with MBT MSS questions.

I take way too much time just comprehending the passages.

Does anyone have any tips on this?

I asked before with some help with LGs and now have perfected those! Now I am onto conquering RCs, and LRs. LR is where I think I can make some decent improvement.

Overall on my PTs I can get 163-166.

RC ranges from -4 to -7. That I am seeing a little improvement here and there.

LR can range from -4 to -7 as well.

LR I feel like I've been on a struggle bus. I work full time, so I do one PT a week, BR, and then try to review it. I also have tried to add some drilling of LRs I feel weak in. (Particularly NAs, PSAs, sometimes MSS).

One thing I have noticed is sometimes I make mistakes from reading a question stem, ac, or stimulus, and miss a VITAL Word! so sometimes I make dumb mistakes here and there....ugh

I am finding with my wrong journal-ling/BR, I know the question stems pretty well and what to do. I often just fall for traps answers as well. In particular the last 5 questions of the section usually beat me up.

I kinda also feel like drilling has made me worse?

Anyways, any advice or tips would be helpful! Is it dumb to drop LR drilling, and just review my wrong journal?

Any tips of how to review wrong journal better?

JY often "plays" with the rules in a LG before he does the questions. Do you all recommend doing this even on timed tests? If so, do you do so in your mind's eye, or actually on paper?

I usually play with the rules in difficult games when I'm doing BR, but not on the timed tests. I'm thinking about whether I should change this practice.

How long has everyone been studying for the august 2022 exam? I am studying basically full time this summer hoping to take the august 2022 exam. Going to have a lot less time once school starts but I am nervous to sign up for it and not end up doing well. Hoping for 165+ score -- what should my score be at the end of June to determine if I should sign up for the August exam or instead do the September/October one?

I'm totally running out of time studying for the August LSAT and it's so hard to admit it. I'm already signed up and paid and everything, no turning back now.... I'm working full time and thought it would be a lot easier to set aside time to study, not realizing how exhausted I'd be. Any advice on what parts I can skim through or skip ahead to??

Pt10 S1 Q19.

I keep getting this one wrong on blind review...

How many lsat preptests should we be taking from now until the august lsat?

I just want to say that this resource was life changing for me. I self studied using only 7sage for 6 months and went from a diagnostic of 154 in December to 177 on my first official LSAT this June. Thank you thank you thank you 7sage, JY, and the community of people here. If I can give back in any way to anyone who is a part of this community, please do not hesitate to reach out to me.

he!

I'm so confused on how C is not the right answer choice for this question, Help!

Hi,

I was practicing making some conditional statements for group 1 by implementing the generic "all jedis use the force" example. Using the "all" indicator, I wrote down the following: "force users are all jedis". Based on the translation rule, this should make sense since jedis is still the sufficient condition (the idea introduced by the indicator) for the necessary condition of being a force user. However, when I read the phrase in plain english without concentrating on the logic, "force users are all jedis" sounds like it is saying "all force users are jedis".

Is "force users are all jedis" still demonstrating the same logic as the original "all jedis use the force" (J→F)? I'm wondering if this is one of those examples where the english language makes a statement sound different than the actual logic within it. I would really appreciate some help/feedback. Thanks

What are some of the ways you learned to study the different flaw types? I've been trying flashcards but I'm not retaining any of it. Any advice?

Hey everyone!

I've been studying logical reasoning for about 3-4 months now and been putting all my energy into it,

I noticed that I am repeatedly scoring around 18-19 questions correct out of one LR section that is typically 24 questions.

WHen I go back to review the questions I am getting consistently incorrect, it usually is flaw in the reasoning questions

the other questions i get wrong are usually because of a silly Mistake like leaving out an important part of the stimulus and not understanding what the stimulus is saying

What are some tips for me that can help me score atleast a 20 on the LR section!?

Thank you!