Discussions

LSAT

New post

307 posts in the last 30 days

Hi everyone!

I searched for this question on the forums and had not found a topic, even though its marked as a difficult question (171 level). After review the AC is fairly obvious, but I am posting to help people that may be confused by this question, and if I say anything wrong, please correct me!

This question is a Necessary Assumption question, basically meaning that if the answer choice is not true, the argument totally falls apart.

A: Incorrect, this does not have to be true for the argument to stay together.

C Incorrect: Who cares about other arts?

D : Incorrect: It does not need to have increased for the argument to be ok, more shows with the same amount of people also works as an increase in public interest.

E: Incorrect: My AC during the test. This is incorrect because it does not matter what the intentions of the opera companies were when they established their companies. All the argument talks about is an explosion of public interest for opera, and that 45 companies founded in the last 30 years, is evidence for this. Assuming E is false, it does not destroy the argument.

Therefore the correct answer is B Which must 100% be true. If its not true, that at a minimum, 45 opera companies opened and ceased operations in the time period where the argument is saying public interest EXPLODED. Do you see the problem here? If all 45 of those founded companies went out of business in the same time period, can you really claim this to be the reason opera exploded in public interest?

0

Did anyone take look at this question, why is the answer not C. It states that price of the reserve is set high enough to yield profit. That means that the seller will make profit on the item , hence the reserve price is needed for desirable item. Any thoughts?

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

0

I’m looking for a RC tutor who can help me drastically improve my RC score and who has helped others go from getting 8-10 questions correct to 20+ correct. Someone who is great at breaking down why a question is correct and why other answers are incorrect. I know there’s a a specific way to attack questions types on RC but I haven’t figured it out. Reading for structure isn’t a problem for me. I understand grabbing the main point, author viewpoint, and whether the author disagrees/agrees with a certain point. My main problem is I tend to attack questions all the same in RC and just like LR, each question cannot and shouldn’t be attacked the same way and requires different ways of attack. Message me if you’re able to help.

0

Hi guys,

I'm having a hard time being able to identify game types and knowing what game board setup to use. I recently just started studying for the logic game section and i'm guessing maybe the only way to learn this is it with practice/experience BUT, I'd like to know if anyone else had trouble with this as well and if any particular tips helped with identifying the game type and board setup.

2

Hey 7Sagers,

Here's the official February 2022 LSAT Discussion Thread.

REMINDER: Under your Candidate Agreement, you may not discuss the details of any specific LSAT questions at any time. For the February 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, Tuesday, February 15th.

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.

Some examples of typical comments:

✅ The following comments are okay 🙆‍♀️

  • the section on Cambodian woodworking really had me second guessing everything.

  • a few of the games had me confused but think I was okay.

  • overall fair test, struggled on a couple of RC passages (damn you polymorphic molecules) but think I was okay hoping for a -2 or -3

    • ❌ The following comments are over the line 🙅‍♂️

  • the passage on Cambodian woodworking didn’t count.

  • I had Cambodian woodworking, Fireflies, and rice farming in Iowa so Lithuanian Lithograph Libraries was experimental.

  • fair test but struggled on a couple RC passages (polymorphic molecules anyone? Thankfully it didn’t count). Don’t want to take again in March

  • Anyone know if Polygamist Societies in the 1880s was real or experimental?

  • Please tell me that polygon dice game didn’t count

    • Good luck to everyone taking the February LSAT!

    **Please keep all discussions of the February 2022 LSAT here!**(/red)

    1

    The correct rationale for choice D being incorrect is its irrelevancy since physiological changes don't sway the argument.

    In blind review, I interpreted the answer choice as relevant because if some of the fish didn't recover rapidly from physiological changes (aka. reproductive abnormalities - sentence 1), then even after the occasional mill shutdowns, though the hormone concentrations return, the physiological changes (aka. reproductive abnormalities) persist. So in essence, the recovery of hormones and dioxin decomposition don't matter at all since the physiological changes/abnormalities happen regardless once the fish contact the dioxin.

    I think I'm jumping the gun with the physiological changes part because the crux of the argument is on the hormone concentrations, even if physiological changes happen after. I think I'm also assuming physiological changes equal reproductive abnormalities. Or even if physiological changes equal reproductive abnormalities, the recovery times don't matter. I'm probably not even addressing the premise the author gives and focusing on the context.

    Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-45-section-1-question-12

    0

    I don't know about you but I'm someone who gets really excited when I stumble upon opportunities to use LSAT skills in the real world. Last night, I found riddle, which turned out to be a 5-layer sequencing game!

    This comes from the video game Dishonored 2 and it's titled the "Jindosh Riddle." The exact details change from game to game so there could be many versions of the same riddle and many solutions out there. If you like riddles--and have transitioned from hating to enjoying LG--this should be fun to solve:

    At the dinner party were Lady Winslow, Doctor Marcolla, Countess Contee, Madam Natsiou, and Baroness Finch.

    The women sat in a row. They all wore different colors and Countess Contee wore a jaunty green hat. Doctor Marcolla was at the far left, next to the guest wearing a red jacket. The lady in white sat left of someone in blue. I remember that white outfit because the woman spilled her wine all over it. The traveler from Baleton was dressed entirely in purple. When one of the dinner guests bragged about her Ring, the woman next to her said they were finer in Baleton, where she lived.

    So Madam Natsiou showed off a prized Snuff Tin, at which the lady from Dunwall scoffed, saying it was no match for her Bird Pendant. Someone else carried a valuable War Medal and when she saw it, the visitor from Fraeport next to her almost spilled her neighbor's beer. Lady Winslow raised her run in toast. The lady from Dabokva, full of absinthe, jumped up onto the table falling onto the guest in the center seat, spilling the poor woman's whiskey. Then Baroness Finch captivated them all with a story about her wild youth in Karnaca.

    In the morning, there were four heirlooms under the table: the Ring, Diamond, the Bird Pendant, and the War Medal.

    But who owned each?

    Answer Key: https://www.reddit.com/r/dishonored/comments/5cvf5p/misson_6_dust_district_jindosh_riddle_solution/

    Enjoy!

    2

    I originally picked C but think I get why C is right - can someone validate my thinking?

    Stim:

    -Context basically (even though it came from treasure hunter): maritime law says that when people risk their lives to save a ship in peril, they can keep whatever they want.

    -Treasure hunter: For ships that have basically been wrecked for a long time, treasure hunters get to keep cargo since they risk their lives to save the ships from oblivion

    -Archaeologist: No, you don't get to keep cargo since these shipwrecks are stable. They're not in danger from anything (aka not in peril) - the only annoying thing they have to deal with are greedy treasure hunters.

    ACs:

    C - Originally I thought that the archaeologist was arguing that the hunters weren't actually being heroic or risking their lives (the "shipwrecks have stabilized over the centuries they have lain underwater" somehow made me think that she was arguing that the waters around the ship were still aka hunters were not risking their lives.) But I guess my confusion was it seemed that she was arguing that the ship wasn't in peril and therefore the hunters weren't even risking their lives?

    The main "devils advocate" to that statement would be that maybe the hunters ARE risking their lives but the they're not saving the ship from oblivion.

    D - Archaeologist seems to agree with this statement that the maritime law can apply here. She's just saying that the ship is literally not in disarray at all and have nothing to save.

    B - Speaks to the fact that "the only danger [the ships] are in" is from "greedy treasure hunters."

    #help

    0

    I'm currently registered for both the April and June 2022 LSAT. If I correctly understand the structure description from LSAC, the LSAT is now 3 scored sections (1 of each type) and 1 unscored experimental section. Does that mean that the test is essentially still a Flex format with the addition of an unscored section, i.e. there is not 2 scored LR sections as the PTs have? If so, should I be choosing to simulate Flex when I am PTing?

    2

    I'm taking a logic class and my professor is making us do LSAT problems for homework (and theres no explanations). How would i properly map out this game?

    Your philosophy course covers seven philosophers: Aristotle, Descartes, Hume, Kant, Locke, Nietzsche, and Plato. Each philosopher is assigned for exactly one week. The order of the readings must meet the following conditions. Rule 1: Hume is assigned before Aristotle but after Kant Rule 2: Descartes is assigned before Plato but after Nietzsche Rule 3: If Locke is assigned before Hume, Descartes is assigned before Locke. Rule 4: If Descartes is assigned before Locke, Descartes is assigned before Hume.

    0

    So unbelievably happy! I started my journey in April 2021 with a 141 diagnostic, it was so discouraging to have people tell me there's no way I can get my goal score of 165+ because the jump is too large. WELL, I can finally say I proved them wrong but I always believed in myself--I think it's easy to compare yourself with others while studying for this exam but mindset is everything. Push yourself, study hard but also take time for self care. I struggle with GAD and ADHD and it has been no easy task but with the proper schedule to balance your time efficiently and positive affirmations, you can reach your goal!

    Huge shoutout to 7Sage as well, I was at a plateau at 160 since September until I decided to start using the problem sets and video explanations to focus on my weaknesses!

    If anyone has any questions, my messages are open :)

    28

    I'm having trouble justifying why only C is correct in this MC question.

    My understanding is that Anita's conclusion is that the journalistic guidance Marcus cites is inadequate. So wouldn't both A and B also be satisfactory answers here? Both say that the guidance Marcus cites is bad, either by saying the guidance is not clear in all ethical dilemmas (A) or that the guidance is not correct in all ethical dilemmas (B). Both clear and correct are used in the guidance cited by Marcus.

    Is my mistake misunderstanding how the word inadequate is used here? So, Anita saying the guidance is inadequate does not mean Anita thinks it is not correct in all dilemmas or not clear in all dilemmas? But to me, both situationally incorrect and situationally unclear mean the guidance is inadequate!

    Sorry if this confusing. I'm confused. To be clear, I understand why C is correct.

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

    0

    Hello all,

    So today was score release day and I'm devastated. I was really hoping to make it before this application cycle was over, but my score today was in the minimum score range of all of my perspective schools. I don't know what to do- every single PT exam I take I score within the 160-170 range, and then every time I take the real exam I score in the 150s. I am so utterly frustrated! I don't know how to close this gap, and extreme test anxiety doesn't help. I think I am going to have to go at this for another year and try again next app cycle. Does anyone have any advice for how to help my actual score reflect PT scores?

    2

    Having a bit of trouble understanding why A is correct (I originally chose C). Could someone clarify? Thank you!

    Stim:

    Ctx: Foundation didn't want their $ to be used for weapons research so uni said none of their $ would be used for the research

    P: None of foundation's $ would benefit weapons research

    C: Foundation rescinded threat

    ACs:

    C - I didn't love this AC, but chose it because none of the others initially seemed correct to me. Descriptively, it is accurate in that the foundation overlooked this possibility that the uni was lying, but I mean it's a short argument, I'm sure they could've overlooked several things.

    I wonder if this C almost attacks the premise in a way - Like, okay sure what if the uni was lying? Then the foundation's grant money would DIRECTLY benefit weapons research. Is this the right way of thinking about it?

    A - I googled around and saw some explanations for why A was correct, but my struggle is that the crux of why this AC is correct is that it hinges on the nuance of direct vs indirect benefit. I didn't even think about indirect benefit until reading explanations for this AC, but wondering if that's a common theme of "direct" vs "indirect" when it comes to certain flaw questions?

    #help

    0

    I'm discouraged because of my January score. I was extremely sick at the time (with Covid) and my score is much lower than I was making on my practice tests. I'm already signed up to retake for the February exam, which is in 10 days, because I want to apply to law school before the March 15th priority deadline. But now I'm doubting myself and rethinking everything and thinking maybe I should wait and retest in the Fall and apply for the next cycle. I just really wanted to go to law school this Fall...

    0

    By problem sets I mean the LR ones with 5 questions each, usually in the middle range (in the numbered list of problem sets). I feel like my brain is burning out too quickly considering that I would have to solve 50 LR questions on the real LSAT.

    Also, how many "3+ difficulty" questions are there usually in a single LR section (approx. 25 questions total)? I'm getting -1 or -0 on problem sets with questions below or equal to "3 difficulty" but getting more than 1 wrong in sets with questions with "3+ difficulty" and am scared :/

    Any help would be very appreciated, thanks guys.

    0

    Confirm action

    Are you sure?