Discussions

LSAT

New post

109 posts in the last 30 days

Hi everyone. This is my first time using the discussion board so I apologize if it's a big longer than the typical posts. If you do decide to read it through though, I so so appreciate you.

This post is about PT5 S5 Q15 and really any other questions that have the same problem. My problem is that the question can have two meanings. Here is the question: "Q's response serves to counter any use by M of the evidence about 85-90 year-olds in support of which one of the following hypotheses?"

The first interpretation of the question can be paraphrased like this: "Which of the following is a hypothesis that Q's response supports and also counters the evidence presented by M?" The second interpretations can be paraphrased as such: "Which of the following is a hypothesis that M's evidence supports that can also be countered by Q. The difference is that in the first interpretation, the clause [in support of which one of the following hypotheses] is completely separate from the others. In the second interpretation, the clause [in support of which one of the following hypotheses] is embedded within the clause [any use by M of the evidence about 85-90 year-olds in support of which one of the following hypotheses].

(In syntactic language, interpretation one has a structure in which the PP [in support of which one of the following hypotheses] is the daughter of the main VP, while interpretation two has a structure in which the same PP is the daughter of the main DP.)

The difference between the two structures is pretty critical because it determines which person the answer choice must support, Q or M. The problem is since both structures are equally valid, both interpretations are correct. So, my question is, how are we the test takers supposed to know which interpretation to assume, when both meanings are grammatically correct?

0

When it comes to these harder disagreement type questions, are we supposed to look for what the two speakers explicitly disagree about or is it supposed to be implied? The video explanation seemed to indicate that it was the latter, but I feel that answer choice C points out something the two speakers were disagreeing about explicitly.

Is Answer choice B incorrect because it talks about the possibility of creating art that "people enjoy and support?" I felt that neither of the two authors gave any answer for that.

As for answer choice E, I read it as saying "express" rather than "achieve." If it had said "express," would this have been the correct answer? JY points out a bunch of assumptions you'd have to make for this to be the correct answer in the video, but are those correct assumptions? He never confirms whether they are or not and then the video ends.

I've also read other explanations that state the reason why this choice is wrong is because it talks about what is "wise" while the speakers only talk about what "should be" but how are those two things mutually exclusive? I felt that if someone were to ask either speaker whether it was wise to have public art that helped "express consensus," Laurie would say yes because it's something that public art "should do" and Elsa would say no because it's an impossible goal.

If anyone is going to answer my questions, please watch the video explanation first or you won't know what I'm talking about.

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-87-section-3-question-22/

0
User Avatar
•

Thursday, Aug 26 2021

jacksonjulien138

LG

I am having problems with the Logical Games especially with grouping and matching. If anyone can help I would appreciate it.

0

Hi everyone,

I am planning to take the LSAT in October. My goal score is 165. I’ve been scoring consistently in the mid 150s and sometimes will score a 158/159. I haven’t been able to crack 160.

Logic games is my worst section by far. Reading comprehension fluctuates. And LR is typically -4/-5. Any advice? It would be greatly appreciated.

1

Hi I understood that B is the best choice but I am confused as to how its pattern really match with the pattern in the stimulus.

Basically, I was threw off when seeing "are designed to" in B and moved on, only to realize all other choices are wrong. By the time I got back to B again, at least 3 min was already wasted!

Is my mindset wrong for thinking that the pattern needs to be highly matched?

Thanks in advance!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-31-section-2-question-23/

0

Hi, folks

I came to cross PT 70 sec1 Q11, and started to wonder what proportional propositions imply.

Let’s say “The more A, the more B” is given as a Premise, not Conclusion

Does this mean that the Only contributing factor to B is the A, regardless of any other factors?

Since it literally means the more A, the more B, if A goes up, then B should go up, right?

Then as long as A is more, then other factors doesn’t matter?

OR is the proposition imply that “if all other factors are equal”? So even if A rises, if the other factors are not equal and offset the proportional relationship between A and B?

0
User Avatar
•

Last comment tuesday, aug 24 2021

dunyakhalil554

Logic Games Tutor

Hey ya'll! I am taking my exam in October and I am looking for a logic games tutor. I desperately need to get better at making inferences and was wondering if a tutor might help. Please reach out if you are up for it. If you are willing to offer free sessions you would be a god-sent but if not I guess we can discuss rates (not really sure how that works but we can figure it out). Thank you!

0

Hi guys - I had a nightmare experience with Proctor U and was just reached out by LSAC to potentially sign up for a retake of the August exam.

For anyone that has taken a retake, does this retake count as an additional attempt? For example, the August exam I took on the 16th was the 2nd time I’ve taken the exam. If I am to take a retake, would this count as my 3rd or will it still remain my 2nd attempt?

Thank you all for your help. Best of luck studying for everyone!

0

RC is one of my strongest sections--I at most go -3. I will be doing an RC session on Tuesday at 11am PST (2pm EST), so feel free to join me! We will be deconstructing a passage together and going over the questions.

I will be posting the Zoom link shortly before the session begins. Feel free to message me if you have any questions.

Thanks for joining, everyone! Sorry the Zoom meeting cut out. If you have any more questions, feel free to message me.

5

Hi Everyone! I am working through the last few sections of the LR part of the course and have struggled with the Parallel Method of Reasoning and Parallel Flaw Questions the most. I find that I take forever to read the AC and second-guess myself. I have gotten better at intuitively answering the other LR types now that I understand what the questions are asking (without Lawgic/diagramming... this is still difficult despite understanding the questions). Do I need to go back and study the Lawgic sections, or is there other approaches that might help?

0

I made myself a reminder sheet for each section with recommendations/strategies to avoid errors I've previously made. Every section I do, I assess why I made each error and what I should do to avoid it, and then I add this recommendation to my reminder sheet.

I thought you guys might benefit from seeing what a sample reminder sheet looks like, the tips here are specific to me and many methods might work for your own LG practice.

  • Don’t go through the game in an automatic way, even if easy game, read and write down rules as carefully as if it were a tough game, sometimes they throw in unexpected things in easy games, and one word can make a big difference to the rules (for example “only if” vs. “if”)

  • If game 3 is really tough, check to see if game 4 is easier and do it first, don’t lose 5-7 points on game 4 by spending all your remaining time on a more difficult game 3

  • Before writing down a rule, play around with it in your head to get the best representation

  • Represent ALL rules even if it’s a weird one to represent (otherwise you risk forgetting about the rule)

  • If unsure how to represent a rule on the gameboard or which elements are important, look at questions to see what they ask about. For example in sequencing games sometimes they’ll make us think it will be double layered when the extra category is not that important and it doesn’t need to be double layered.

  • To check a rule, re-read it and imagine how you would represent it, and then check if the representation you already did matches sup

  • Check how each rule interacts with others, sometimes a rule might connect to several other rules, not just to the rule that came before it.

  • Check for floaters and circle or highlight them

  • Are there any interchangeable variables (floaters, variables affected by the same rule in the same way) or interchangeable groups?

  • if you're aiming to get all 4 games, splitting should be a LAST RESORT

  • Don’t split until you’ve read all rules and checked all your rule representations (otherwise might split on mis represented rule or on not the best rule to split on

  • Don’t automatically dive into a split without first checking if you need to by attempting some of the questions that give additional inferences. Might be a waste of time.

  • Split on rules that are annoying to have in rule list (for example conditional statements).

  • If the game has a lot of possibilities and nothing to do a split on, then it will be a rule driven game. If there aren’t any questions that prompt new gameboards (all the questions are “what must be true” and “what cannot be true”) then create my own few gamboards to see how rules play out and if I can make any inferences from that.

  • If you make any new inferences while doing questions, add the new inference to the main gameboard/ rule list

    • 80

    Just finished my first LSAT take (August) and thought this would be a good time to give something back to the 7Sage community!

    I've been studying for the LSAT for a year. I started with a diagnostic of 157 (although it wasn't a true diagnostic score as I'd done the Blueprint video course beforehand). I've gotten my PT score up to the 170s with my highest being 177, and a lot of that improvement was thanks to the 7sage question taking interface and explanation videos.

    I also found a wonderful tutor @Christopherr through 7sage who helped me get from the low 160s to the 170s.

    The most intimidating section for me was logic games. Although I got to a point where I understood the games and could do them without losing any points untimed, when it came to doing all 4 games under time, I felt hopeless.

    Thanks to a combination of @Christopherr, 7sage, and analysing my own mistakes, I learned about several strategies that I could use to shave off time without losing out on accuracy and wanted to share them with anyone who might be interested.

    This session is aimed at people who are familiar with all the game and question types and are now working on their speed. If you're a beginner you might benefit too as these tips could prevent you from forming some unhelpful habits.

    We'll go through a sample game or two (I'll pick some from the pre-60s so as not to "spoil" any more recent ones) while I talk us through my approach, and you can ask any LG related questions that you have.

    To join the session, just use the Zoom link below.

    Topic: LG group tutoring session

    Time: Aug 21, 2021 10:00 AM Eastern Time (US and Canada)

    Join Zoom Meeting

    https://us05web.zoom.us/j/89850497645?pwd=dmhjR0ovNGl2T09KSWNGcmZQV25xZz09

    Meeting ID: 898 5049 7645

    Passcode: 6aEeDr

    32

    I don't get how this is the right answer. I'm aware the color red usually means stop and the color yellow usually means yield but why should I need to assume outside information like that to get this answer correct?

    How am I supposed to know this from just the stimulus. Am I missing something?

    0

    What’s up fam - it’s your boi lsat_sus.

    I hope the Aug flex folks practice some self-empathy if you didn’t feel too hot on your exam. “Just keep swimming” as the great blue aquatic specimen so graciously stated.

    I just took PT 86 and did “not bad,” and after thorough review I think I got the underlying logical reasoning structure for the second LR section. I’d love to discuss it with y’all this Saturday night at 7:30pm** CST.

    The plan is to do the entire section together and explain what I extrapolated from those questions that I hope will be applicable to future LR questions.

    Topic: PT 86 S4 Review

    Join Zoom Meeting

    https://us02web.zoom.us/j/6898274355?pwd=RHpGUFkxR2FyUlkxeS9iOGZqdE1XZz09

    Meeting ID: 689 827 4355

    Passcode: 152658

    Much thanks,

    lsat_sus

    7

    I don't understand how E is the right answer over D. I eliminated the answer choice E because she claimed to be an insurance adjuster and didn't provide proof. How is claiming to be anything providing enough proof of being a government official? If the answer choice said the insurance adjuster provided some kind of proof I would have opted for it but ended up picking D because the government official provided proof, and I don't consider being evasive necessarily lying.

    0
    User Avatar
    •

    Last comment saturday, aug 21 2021

    pmessa26697

    August Retest

    Hey yall! So my testing experience went so bad to the point that I cried when testing was done. I filed my complaint and luckily they offered me a retest next week. Anything I should be concerned about for next week's test?

    0
    User Avatar
    •

    Last comment friday, aug 20 2021

    gmiller1500963

    LG-LR-RC-LG

    My first LG was about security guards (brutal). My second involved camps. I hope the first was was experimental. If anyone has any insight please lmk.

    1

    Confirm action

    Are you sure?