Hey all!

I've been working really hard on LR and am seeing a lot of improvement so far, however one area that I am still having a lot of difficulty with is in flaw questions...

I have been practicing with the two step test when I can't identify the flaw, but for whatever reason I find it very easy to gaslight my own reasoning with these wrong answer choices, than in comparison to other question types' wrong answer choices.

Any advice on being able to find the right answer even when you don't spot the flaw would be much appreciated!

I'm frustrated that B was the correct answer

Reasoning:

We have to create an assumption that if something makes an appearance, then it strongly helps

That's like saying if I live in miami, and cancer goes down then my psychic power claims are strengthened

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

Explanation Video: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-89-section-4-question-10/

Hi,

I am trying to balance my study for all three sections. Also I am noticing my RC score drop if I've not reading intensively for days. But since I've full-time job so I am figuring out what would be a good way to maintain my reading also balancing other sections and my work.

so do you do a full timed section everyday? or just one untimed passage with a deep dive review? or actually just reading books/magazine of your interest for few hours?

Thank you vey much for sharing!

AM Times went super fast so hurry! I thought the earliest we could take the test was the 21st, but apparently the 14-17 is available Whooo hooo!

Hi everyone, wondering if i could get your help with Q23 "According to rational-choice theory, popular support"...

Would someone be able to help in explaining why D is wrong and A is right? I thought since D has "is never a complex phenomenon" while the stim conc says "simple", it's wrong, in which case I can't similarly justify A ... Thank you!

Is there a worksheet that tells us what group the logical indicators are in?

Delete

#help

What exactly does general principle mean? I see it constantly throughout the logical reasoning answer choices. Very rarely is it included in the actual right answer, but I would love to have a better understanding of the term and what would constitute a general principle, so that I can eliminate the answer choices more quickly. I have a basic understanding, but I feel like it is an ambiguous phrase for me at this point, therefore, when I see in the answer choices, I have to take unnecessary time to rule it out.

My understanding is that in normal times, water vapor from ocean contains a heavier proportion of oxygen-18. However, if that water vapor is not retuning to the Ocean during ice ages, but getting trapped in glaciers, wouldn't that mean the ocean has LESS o-18? I guess I'm assuming the water vapor is taking O-18 out of the ocean. But even if that's not assumed, what warrant do we have to say the ocean has more O-18 than usual?

Can someone explain why B can't be a good answer? My logic was that everyone that reads the book agreeing that the incidents could happen, i.e. not implausible, doesn't mean that the story isn't implausible since they can well interpret it wrong.

#help

I don't know whether to be super sad or super angry right now, so I'll settle on both. My test ended up starting 45 minutes late because of "technical difficulties." NOT ON MY END; I checked everything the night before. On THEIR end, and they were just really unfriendly and unhelpful about it. I could not possibly hate ProctorU more if you paid me.

The connection kept on "dropping," according to them. I went through multiple technical agents. They told me to change my privacy settings, reboot my computer, and on and on and on.

By the time I actually got into the test, I was so flustered it didn't even matter that I'd studied for 9 months, felt 100% ready, and was eerily calm in the days leading up to the test. I already knew I wasn't going to do well, and I'm pretty sure I bombed the first half.

Now, luckily I was smart enough to sign up for November, so in another month I get to do this all again (joy!). I just feel like such a tremendous failure right now; like I wasted 9 months of my life, like it was stupid of me to dare hope I could do something as challenging as go to law school.

Commiserate with me, please.

Hello comrades in misery! My name is Joey and I've been studying for the LSAT for over a year now. I've managed to score consistently in the mid-160's, but haven't been able to get close enough to 170 to feel comfortable going into the exam in a few weeks.

Brief rundown of my skill progression: I legitimately could not do logic games, timed or untimed, to save my life until a few months ago. I studied for most of 2020 and quickly realized LR and RC were my strong suits; I was always -2 or -3 on LR and -1 or -2 on RC. The games, however, were impossible (-10 to -15). Toward the end of 2020 I decided to completely take a break from studying for 4 months. Upon returning to studying, I became near perfect in Logic Games! Finally, I thought, that elusive 170+ was in reach... but that was not the case. In the time I took off from studying and the extra time upon returning devoted to LG, my LR skills significantly atrophied. I've been scoring consistently -4 to -8 on both LR sections of PTs for the last month and a half, and its been the most soul-crushing experience trying to figure out why what appeared to be a natural aptitude for me (and certainly is; I'm a bookworm and political theory major who gets unusually excited by a well-crafted sentence) has become the main thing stopping me from getting to where I need to be.

SO, AT MY ROPE'S END, I'M CALLING UPON THE COMMUNITY HERE FOR HELP. IF ANY 170+ SCORERS (OR EVEN VERY HIGH 160'S) WITH A PARTICULAR STRENGTH IN LR IS WILLING AND ABLE TO OFFER TWO TO THREE HOURS A WEEK BEFORE THE NOVEMBER TEST TO HELP A GUY OUT, I AM WILLING TO COMPENSATE YOU FOR YOUR TIME (WE CAN DISCUSS WHAT IS ACCEPTABLE PRIVATELY)

Being a lawyer is an ambition of mine for intellectual reasons, but also for personal and familial ones. A little help- even to see how one of you thinks, how you approach specific question types- just might be the key to helping me get where I need to be to realize my goals. As a quick remedy, if anybody has any FLAW question strategies, drop 'em in the comments!

Much love to you all (and sorry for the long note),

Joey R.

Title says it all.

Sorry to be a Debby downer, but I keep coming back to this game section and constantly freeze (especially with game 1)

I won't give up and will keep coming back to it in case LSAC decides to go to the archives for their next test

Hey 7Sagers,

Here's the official October 2021 LSAT Discussion Thread.

REMINDER: Under your Candidate Agreement, you may not discuss the details of any specific LSAT questions at any time. For the October LSAT, general discussion of what sections you had, or how difficult you found a given section, or speculation about which sections were scored or unscored, is prohibited until after 9pm ET, Thursday, October 14, 2021.

Posts that violate these rules will be taken down and may result in disciplinary action from LSAC. Let’s work together to ensure the test is fair to everyone, and not share information before everyone has taken the test.

**Please keep all discussions of the October 2021 LSAT here!**(/red)

Update: October 15, 2021

Rules:

✅ You can identify experimental sections. 🙆‍♀️

You can say things such as the following:

❌ You can't discuss specific questions. 🙅‍♂️

You CANNOT say things such as the following:

I am having problem with Logical Games, do anyone wants to get together to attack this part of the test.

Another recent RC question where I feel like there's something I'm just not getting about RC. (D) seems well-supported to me: if forced to liquidate, a bankrupt company will only pay its lenders, and through a fire sale/liquidation. With the reorganization system, the business restructures, in a way that should allow them to pay off more than just their lenders, but other stakeholders as well.

With (E), "finance the establishment of a new business," I get that it's vaguely supported by the notion that lenders may charge more if reorganization is the system rather than liquidation, but this seems like a needle-in-a-haystack inference and I'm still not seeing what makes it any better than (D).

Taking the LSAT on Tuesday and I swear RC will be the death of me. I'll get -0 LG and -0 or -1 LR and then bomb -3 or -4 RC and have to retake. Unless you wise people can help, lol.

I feel like there are a lot more recent-test RC questions that have me scratching my head. I understand the LSAT writers are extremely skilled and make their questions bulletproof from challenges/ambiguity, but I cannot for the life of me figure out how (A) is better than (D), or how (A) is supported in any way.

The notion of the crop geneticists being "too willing to further intense efforts to maximize the land's agricultural output" just makes no sense to me in the context of the passage. All the author basically says is they've tended to focus their research and thinking on the North American varieties, and then notes that the North American methods seek to "maximize the land's output for economic reasons." If there were an article about how some scientists have tended to focus their research and thinking around GMOs, could it be reasonably inferred that the author of such a passage would agree that the researchers are "too willing to further GMOs"? It makes absolutely no sense to me. (D) on the other hand, makes a lot of sense to me because it seems natural and supportable, based on the lines around "crop geneticists," that the author would agree that the reason the geneticists have taken an interest in the heirloom crops is the fact that they can maximize yield.

I love the old RC tests because I could get -0 relatively easily: just stay focused, understand the structure, know where the key info is located, and find the pertinent lines that support the correct answer for each question. On recent RCs I'm consistently getting -2 to -3 and I feel like there's something I'm just not getting but I don't know what that is.

Help?

I have no idea what C is trying to say, and no clue how can C be the answer that provides an alternative explanation to why the scientists are discrediting Smith. Can someone give an explanation? Thanks

#help

The rule is "Either P is an ingredient or Y is an ingredient, but not both." It's easy enough to see that both of them cannot be in, but does this rule mandate that AT LEAST one of them is in? If so, can you also point me to the lecture in the core curriculum where this is explained?

Thanks so much

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-89-section-1-game-2/

What the title says. I've been studying for the LSAT for a while now, and frankly LR is the only section that seems to utterly piss me off. I can do analytical reasoning and reading comprehension just fine (the only time I get mad on those is when the highlighter feature is being overly-sensitive, but I've learned how it works) but when I do the games, I flat out want to scream and throw things when things stop making sense.

I'm not really someone who deals with anxiety on the LSAT as I often hear others have. For me, it's frustration and anger. I took the August LSAT and I nearly blew a gasket in the middle of the logic games sections.

I think I need to study more, get the fundamentals down more, and overall just expose myself to more difficult problems with a cool mindset. This is really holding me back. I was going to take a practice test today but decided against it so I could focus more on the games in a casual setting without the timer.

Any advice? This test is a challenge of our patience, too, as you all know. Thanks.

I was one of the people whose exam begun and then crashed afterwards in the middle of it.

If you haven't yet:

Submit an Official Compliant ("connectivity issues AND press cancel score, NOT keep score)

Give a brief description

Submit

They will contact you in 2 to 3 days about rescheduling. She also said after you can contact proctoru to schedule tomorrow or Tuesday if slots are available. Regardless, the scores will be out by October 27 either way!!!

She had also said that the 21st is def one of the days for rescheduling, but they are probably gonna have more options due to the velocity of people whose test crashed during the exam. I wanted to tell you guys because I have tried emailing, calling, trying via proctoru and got not helpful response. I hope this helps you!

Lawhub shut down about 3 times during my exam. The second time I had to wait over an hour. The second time I was also doing reading comprehension so once it was back up I had to re-read the passage and lost time on the exam.

Has this happened to anyone before? Is it reasonable to ask for a refund on the test or the score be cancelled?

I am scheduled for tomorrow, but it looks like LSAC is a mess today :/. Has anyone even been able to finish the whole test without issues? Any advice for Sunday test takers?

Also sorry to everyone that has had issues with the exam, I know it must have been extremely frustrating. I hope y'all are able to get through to LSAC soon!

I’ve attempted each of these questions twice and chose the same answers each time around, B/B/A respectively. Can someone explain to me why these answer choices are wrong and the correct ones correct?

Can someone please give a breakdown of this question? I am having trouble understanding what the flaw is.

P: Tech institute has been using new exp. curriculum for several years

P: survey last year found only1/3 of the plumbing grads were able to pass certification test

C: New curriculum has lowered the quality of plumbing instruction

Anticipation: what if its entirely another cause? or maybe it was just a bad year?

I chose AC A through process of elimination but have no idea why it's wrong and why C is correct.

Thanks!