Discussions

LSAT

New post

307 posts in the last 30 days

I am about to fool proof all games from PTs 1-35. Is it recommended to fool proof by game type? Meaning is it better to do, say, all of the in/out games from 1-35, then turn to other game types? Or is it recommended to go straight through the games in PTs 1-35 and, therefore, be exposed to many different game types in a random order?

0

What should I do about these games? I'm foolproofing PT1-35 and I hit the stretch of PT10-16 and there was one pattern game on each and I was just dumbfounded. I couldn't do it on first glance and it has me worried if it pops up in 2022.

https://www.reddit.com/r/LSAT/comments/ajfrzi/comprehensive_list_of_rarely_tested_logic_games/

on that list, there was a 20 year gap between the pattern games. Why did it just come up in the mid 2010s again?

I'm just worried bc most of the misc games I've came across in PT1-35 had me paralyzed when I first saw them. Although, I think I wouldn't see some of those misc games on the newer LSATs like the train station and the pattern one with words(hopefully not). What are y'all thoughts and advices on this?

0

I will soon finish the CC and plan to fool proof all games from tests 1-35 before I start taking PTs. My question is: when fool proofing, should you BR a game each time you complete it? I realize that, in most instances, you will do a game multiple times and watch JY's explanation for the game multiple times, so should you BR each game each time you complete them? Or should you go straight to the explanation video once you've done the game two or three times?

0

Can someone help me out here. This question and the way it's worded is giving me a great deal of difficulty.

From what I can gather the argument has two premises – a principle and a fact:

P1 - if competent to pass judgement on a subject → don't lack knowledge of the subject

P2 - Political "know-how" is a type of knowledge learned through apprenticeship and experience.

C - Therefore, if competent to judge whether a particular policy is fair to all → seasoned politician

In my estimation, this argument needs two things: First, it has to show that a "seasoned politician" doesn't lack knowledge of a subject. It does this by making the assumption that "if you have political know-how → you're a seasoned politician;" Second, it must then assume that "political know-how" and "[not lacking] knowledge of a subject" are the same thing. Reason being: Just because you have a type of knowledge, i.e. political know-how, doesn't mean you don't lack knowledge of politics. I feel like AC D then would best encapsulate this flaw.

Does this reasoning check out?

Also, if this question made sense to you intuitively would you mind explaining your thought process when reading the stimulus and identifying the flaw?

Many thanks.

0

I am a bit confused with this question. This is a classic cause --> effect stimulus and we are being asked to strengthen the cause and effect relationship.

To strengthen, there are three ways:

1/ Show that cause happens --> effect happens

2/ Show that cause does not happen --> effect does not happen

3/ Show that an alternate explanation is not responsible for both cause and effect

A/ What can't this be the third option? Doesn't the fact that there is no greater incidence of kidney disease for folks who have the bacteria in their stomach rule out the alternative explanation that kidney disease was not responsible for both the ulcer and bacteria?

E/ I understand that this is (no cause --> no effect) and is a strengthener, but I picked A since I was moving quickly in this section and to me, AC A seemed like an obvious alternative explanation that was being ruled out.

What am I missing?

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

0

I have heard that the June LSAT is significantly harder.. is that true? I have heard it from a few people and I am nervous. Also I want to apply for Fall 2022, and it says the deadline is 06/30/22... I got a 136 on the first LSAT (I did not study at all) and I am wondering if law schools will consider my second score if I get it after I apply to law school.

0

Hi I was wondering if any one could give me any advice? It's been 3 months of intense Logical Reasoning and under timed conditions I continuously miss 7-10! And then I proceed to look at the ones I got wrong and I don't look at the answer key I simply choose what would have been my second answer and I end up getting -1 to -3. And at this point I'm wondering if I'm just stressed or should be more patient and just get more tests under my belt to feel more comfortable. I'm at the point where when I review the Explanation Videos I can't really write any new notes cuz I'm already familiar with the answer style. I guess one thing that I have noticed that gets me frustrated is I don't really know at times if the LSAT wants me to use common sense logical analysis or deep conditional/causation/Comparison logic. I have literally gotten answers wrong that 91% get right simply because I went down a rabbit hole of being too naive that LSAT would never give an answer this simple. I know that that the first 10 should be easier than the rest but even then I can't help but notice myself get answer right that only 61% got right.. and miss an answer that 91% got right any suggestions???

1

I was just thinking to myself that a lot of JY's work, especially in logical reasoning questions, use diagrams and logically expressions. But on the digital test, I can't draw or write any sort of lawgic near the questions to help me answer the questions. We do get 5 pages of scrap paper, but I often find myself saving that for the Logic Games in the event that I get a double logic game section. Is there anyway around this limitation?

Please note: I am not asking to literally get around scrap paper limitations. I want to learn your strategy of dealing with difficult questions with or without scrap paper.

1

Hi!

I'm so confused about the strategy for elimination on MOR questions.

I eliminated b and d straight away reading 'positive'. I thought the answer choice should include words of 'certainty' due to 'we can be sure'. Is my elimination strategy too extreme? I usually do this on method of reasoning first eliminating explicitly wrong answers from several cues, but I think for this one was too extreme to just eliminate right away?

Besides, I usually separate 'quantitative' and 'qualitative' + overall structure cues, and match three kinds of cues to each answer choice, eliminate and confirm. Is this strategy okay?

Huge thanks in advance for someone who can advise me for this questions and overall strategy!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-70-section-4-question-17/

0

Good Evening, Everyone.

Can someone please share some knowledge with me revolving around question 12 of PT.33? My specific question pertains to understanding the written logic, which is used to solve the question.

The lawgic is /S --> J --> H --> /G --> /W. There is an “M” below the J pointing to the H as well; however, what is confusing to me is drawing an arched arrow backward from the H to the /S. Once I have done that, how the lawgic plays out is confusing to me; and therefore, how the correct answer is reached. I have watched the video on this question more than once and I am still confused.

If anyone can share anything regarding this question, I would appreciated it. I hope my question makes sense.

Thank you!

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

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-33-section-4-game-2/

0

Hi all,

Based on the 4th paragraph, I wanna know how do you tell where the author's tone/ emphasis lies? Through the whole 4th paragraph, it seems to me that the author is simplyly reporting the critics' viewpoint. That is, the author sounds quite detached, IMO. I couldn't see any line or word which suggest author endorese or commit to either a critic or proponent.

Could you please share how do you see this paragraph? Thanks a lot.

Admin Note:

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-32-section-2-passage-2-questions/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-32-section-2-passage-4-passage/

0

Hey, so I recently did this MSS question and I struggled to understand why A is the answer, could anyone help pls? I picked B cause I really didn't know what else to choose. I didn't like A cause it said a "comprehensive approach" but how do we know that a comprehensive approach could shrink the health care costs?

Thank you :)

0

Confirm action

Are you sure?