I've never seen a MSS Q that required me to make any assumptions when analyzing the consistency of one premise to the next. Just some assumptions in choosing the conclusion from the answer choices. So do you guys think it's fair to say we'll never see a MSS Q with a flaw in the stimulus?

Hello,

I feel like I have a solid grasp of the RC section, but almost always consistently get -2 or 3 wrong on each passage. This is for all difficulty levels, and all topics. At first I had issues with the main point questions, but I feel like I'm good on that now. I'm trying to understand what I can do to gain insight into why I keep getting the same number of problems wrong, and how I can improve from here. I don't know if this is random or because I am missing out on doing something. Any insight is welcome, thank you!

Can someone explain to me why D is the right answer? I chose B, but I did not feel very strongly about its accuracy.

I am really confused, the more I study for RC the more my score decreases. I used to get 6-7 RC questions wrong but now I am getting 16 wrong, please help!

Can someone explain to me why C is wrong and E is correct? I was pretty confident that C is the correct answer.

Disclaimer: Making sub-game boards might not be the method that works best for everyone, and 7Sage states that it is possible to do every question WITHOUT a sub-game board. This is simply my testimony on how it has made me the most confident I've ever been on LG.

While logic games has always been my best section, it took a while for my brain to naturally do them in an organized manner. I was good at seeing the rules and creating my master game board, but I didn't make second level deductions, which meant no sub-game boards, which meant 10 different copies of my master game board that were extremely unorganized.

As I have practiced doing logic games more and more, I have come to realize that sub-game boards, even if they are not 100% filled out or solved, are life saviors. Most people think that sub-game boards are only worth doing when you can fill them out completely, but this is untrue. Sub-game boards, no matter how filled out, are simply additional visuals for you to write down facts about the rules that you already know. When I first starting considering sub-game boards, I found myself finishing with about 2 minutes left but getting -3/4 from silly mistakes. After I really started making deductions a natural step in my LG routine, I started to finish with 6-8 minutes left, only getting -1/0. Logic games has always been my best section but today I hit my personal best by finishing PrepTest 81 Logic Games with 9:40 left on the clock and getting -0, and it was all thanks to the sub-game boards (I did one for every question so maybe I just got lucky lol).

To those struggling to complete Logic Games or those who finish but just find themselves making little mistakes, try focusing more on your ability to create sub-game boards. Granted, not every game will be ideal for sub-game boards, however, they are beyond helpful when you can find them. Also, it will get you into the habit of naturally connecting rules and deducing inferences. DONT BE AFRAID TO SPEND TIME ON MAKING THE SUB-GAME BOARDS. I might spend six minutes on writing the sub-game boards but when it allows me to do each question in less than 30 seconds, you'll find that you spend a lot less time on the game despite the perceived 'slow start'. They also help you from making small mistakes because they provide more detailed anchor points to compare the questions to so you don't get lost or panic in making 8 or 10 copies of your master game board.

Could anyone explain either of these to me? Thanks!!!!

Anyone have any tips on how to tackle these questions? Usually goes: which one of the following would be most useful in evaluating the argument made. I've been trying to identify an assumption and pick the answer choice that is relevant to that assumption but it's working 50/50.

I have been studying for around 25 - 35 hours per week since May. I started with a diagnostic score of 152, and after about 6 weeks of studying, hit a consistent score of 165 and saw some major improvements. However, the past two weeks I have been getting 160s and 161s on my practice tests which has resulted in a loss of confidence. LR has always been my weak point, but I have now seen a decline in my LG and RC sections as well. I am getting extremely frustrated because I thought I was on track to hit my goal of getting a 167+ on my LSAT in August. I am getting extremely nervous the test as it is approaching quickly. Has this happened to anyone and if so, what is your advice?

I am looking for what books are a good resource for improving RC. Already read the LSAT Trainer and the Bible and they helped but am looking for more improvement and timing.

I am currently signed up for the August LSAT but I have not been testing close enough to my goal on my most recent PTs. I'm worried I won't be able to improve enough by test time. Should I reschedule and take the October instead? This will be my first time taking the LSAT but I am applying for law school this fall so October will be my last shot anyway. Would it be worth it at all to take August, since I'm already registered, even with the risk of a low score? #help

I think I get it? Non-individuals can buy cars too but what if answer choice e had stated that the proportion of individuals and non-individuals (i.e., corporations etc) purchasing cars were about the same (50/50) Would that make answer choice e incorrect or just less strong of a weakener? And why? Couldn't a small sliver of the population still drive up the average price of whatever commodity the stimulus chooses to bring up, whether it be cars or cheese?

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-26-section-3-question-24/

For the available LSAT questions is there a way to post them and discuss? I clicked discuss but I do not think it allowed me to share the question.

I took a diagnostic on Khan Academy and scored a 160. I feel really good about how the curriculum has been going. Is it reasonable to think I could score 170+ by the August LSAT? I plan on studying 20-25/week until then.

Heck yes.

The title is pretty self-explanatory but I need help on #7. Why is E incorrect? And what makes A the right fit? I feel that I have no strategy when it comes to these argument completion style questions, especially when it comes to answer choices that just both sound right. I ultimately had trouble picking an answer at all because the entire passages seemed geared towards discussing how and why women were disadvantaged in the work force; the last sentence literally ended on women but both of these answer choices included men. Even the comments section for this passage contains unanswered questions as to why E is incorrect; one was from a former tutor posted five years ago.

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-7-section-3-passage-1-questions/

Hi there!

I was wondering if anyone had any ideas/advice for the best way to take prep tests for the Aug 2021 exam with the added variable section. I've been using just the flex option on PTs (as that's what we're "actually" being scored on + the unscored section isn't always going to be LR) but I am now worried that my test stamina won't be what it needs to be for the actual 4 sections. Anyone have any tips or tricks on how to make a PT with an added 4th variable (or anything else that will help tackle the added unscored section?)

Thanks so much :)

I think I understand what the premises are saying, but I don't understand where the author of this stimulus even got his conclusion. If we have luggages that don't contain explosives and only one percent give false positives (alarm goes off even though there aren't any actual bombs), then how can we conclude that 99/100 alerts=actual bomb threats? Shouldn't the proper conclusion be that there aren't any actual bomb threats in this scenario even if the alarm does go off because the luggages don't have bombs in them? I've always felt there was something wrong with the conclusion, but I just cannot put my finger on what is the actual problem and the abstract nature of E isn't helping.

Edit: Is the conclusion wrong because we don't actually know the proportion of hypothetical luggages that do contain bombs? For example, if we have 1000 luggages and none have bombs, then the conclusion would make no sense since there would be 10 false positives where the alarm goes off, but literally 0 have bombs instead of the 99% accuracy the conclusion is suggesting. I still don't understand which group is being substituted for which though.

I'm not understanding why this question is A. I can tell in some capacity why it is correct, but it appears to simply restate information already present in the question (treating diseases is more expensive than preventing them).

On the other hand, B provides information that, if untrue, would fundamentally break down the structure of the argument (if it's more expensive to treat than to screen but screening does nothing, you have no choice but to treat anyway).

Why is B incorrect, and why is A correct if it doesn't provide any new information?

Does anyone know when sign ups for the August 2021 LSAT is? I know registration has closed, but when do we pick the date and time of the actual exam? Thanks

I got a 139. After months and months of trying to study and listening to podcasts of people getting astronomical scores, I got a 139. I think its clear that I will not be going to law school. I'm at my wit's end right now and have never felt so defeated in my life. I'm currently on vacation and will reassess whether to not I will continue with this far fetched idea or just f**ing quit now.

Can someone explain PTC, S2 Q22?

Admin note: edited title; please use the format of "PT#.S#.Q# - [first set of words]"

I understand why the answer is A, however I do not understand why it cannot also be D. I know there is only one answer I am just unsure why D is definitively wrong. Thanks #HELP

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

Why is the Answer B? What rules out C? Thanks

Help

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

Is this a correlation-causation argument because it assumes that the increase in high school dropouts is the only thing that is causing the increase in recruitment among 18 year olds? And why would the author draw such a conclusion?

And I know there's an explanation vid for this, but why is A incorrect? If the conclusion had said "solely dependent" on high school dropouts, would A weaken?

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-28-section-3-question-11/