Discussions

LSAT

New post

308 posts in the last 30 days

This helped me with a rc speed a lot at no detriment to comprehension that might help others! I trace the entire passage with my finger tracing my computer screen, my speed has increased and it helps me keep my speed at a consistent pace. Try it out!

8

I recently did this question and I'm still confused to how it could be choice B.

"the argument relies on the testimony of experts whose expertise is not shown to be sufficiently broad to support their general claim."

What do they mean by sufficiently broad? Sufficiently broad enough? Doesn't it seem like their argument is TOO broad? That large institutions such as universities and schools tend to get hacked therefore security needs to be a top priority?

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-june-2007-section-2-question-17/

0

After months of studying. I am still having problem how to set some of the games up. Especially when it comes to sequencing and others. If someone out there wants to help or to study together, I would appreciate it. Thank You.

1

Hi all, I noticed that the questions that I typically get wrong in LR are the ones that -for the life of me- I can't understand on my first couple of reads. So I can't come up with a good pre-phrase and it makes it significantly harder for me to choose the right answer.

For example, I recently did PT 81 and the first LR section had questions that, after review, were very understandable but I just couldn't get it. I'll read each sentence, but then put together i'm thinking "what the heck is this stim even getting at?" Have any of you been in this position and are able to come up with a way to view the stim differently/ force your brain to rewire the way you approach it?

Any insight is much appreciated- TIA!

0

The 7Sage course made me extremely proficient at LG and that was my weakest section prior to coming here. But not so much for LR or RC. Does anyone have any advice or recommendations on how to find someone or something as good as this course is at teaching LG, but for LR and RC? Already tried Kaplan, they're no good. Tried the PowerScore Bibles, no good. Tried LSAT Trainer, ehhh, gave me a slight improvement to master the first 10-12 questions for LR but not so much beyond those.

My problem with LR is that I go through the first 10-12 questions averaging -1 or -2 on a consistent basis but have a huge drop off for the next 12-14 questions thereafter and end up going -10 through -12 EVERY SINGLE TIME.

My problem with RC is that I go -2 or -3 on 6 question passages, -3 or -4 on 7 to 8 question passages and I can only finish 3 passages total and end up guessing on one passage.

I am opening to a tutor or study buddy, or anyone who can help me. I was told by someone that the reasons I am getting the first 10-12 questions for LR is because I have a strong basic understanding of LR but not an advanced understanding of LR and therein lies my problem.

BTW, I am a twice 140 scorer and my latest LSAT score was 145, a 5 point improvement. I am trying to get to a 155-160 and I have one last LSAT attempt.

Thanks

2

Hello, 7Sagers! I seem to have a difficult time committing to memory the differences in language for Q stems in Logical Reasoning for MBT, MSS, PSA, SA, NA, and sometimes Strengthening & Principle question types. I get tripped up because the difference in the Q stem's wording is subtle, and when I don't have a solid grasp of what is being asked it makes it difficult for me to plan my attack of the answer choices. I'd also like to be confident in what type of question it is so I can frame my mind around what direction the support should flow (upwards or downwards).

For example:

I have seen ("WOTF principles, if valid, most helps to justify the reasoning...") to be Q stems for both Principle and PSA questions.

Or the fact that this Strengthening question has most strongly supported it it ("The conclusion of the _____'s argument is most strongly supported if WOTF completes the argument?")

Or the differences between this MSS Q stem (""WOTF can be most reasonably inferred by the...") and this MBT Q stem ("WOTF can be properly inferred from the statements above?")

I am aware of the fact that just because the word "principle" appears in the Q stem doesn't mean it is a Principle type question, however I still struggle to discern the subtle differences between these types of questions. Does anyone have a method they use to nail down the differences?

NOTE: Which of the following = WOTF

0

.#help

For this one, I mapped the stimulus as

/sellout ---> poorly prepared

/SO

poorly prepared (equals to not properly prepared)

Isn't this technically what the question stem is? But how can I match this to AC C, which should be negating necessary condition. Is it permissible to contrapositive it to fit in C? Am I doing something wrong here?

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-74-section-4-question-19/

0

Hi all,

Recently I went through 10 passages (old & recent) and totaled up all my missed questions.

My top two missed were InfAP and Inf OP overwhelmingly. Does anyone have guidance or tips for improving on these question types?

(For reference if needed, my third most missed was tied between InfAA, UAO, RecMP (lol) and RecS).

Thanks!

0

When combining an "all" statement that shares its sufficient condition with the necessary condition of a "most" statement, how do you determine the sufficient/necessary order between the new terms? It's my understanding that this combination of statements would result in a valid "most" statement, but I don't understand which condition becomes sufficient and which becomes necessary.

For instance, if:

A --> B

C (most) -- A

Would the accurate conclusion be C (most) -- B, or B (most) -- C?

1

One of my biggest weaknesses at Flawed Method of Reasoning is distinguishing between a minor flaw and a major flaw in a stimulus that has multiple flaws, and the answer choices include both flaws. In the explanation video of PT19 S2 Q07, JYP was able to identify the minor flaw by hypothetically eliminating it and seeing if the conclusion is still logical. When it wasn't he identified that flaw as the minor flaw. However, can't this also be used for major flaws? If you eliminate the major flaw, the argument will still not be completely logical because the minor flaw is still there. So, to me it seems like that method does not really distinguish between minor and major flaws because applying it to both types of laws yield the argument as weak in both cases.

I'm really struggling with this and any advice is appreciated!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-19-section-2-question-07/

2

Hi, I was curious if anyone had any 7sage videos that they would suggest someone scoring mid 150's should re-watch in the couple of weeks leading to the November test. Any videos that you think explain something often forgotten or gave you a feeling of clarity would be appreciated!

Thank!

1

I just couldn't anticipate the flaws with either of these questions and would like to know how people who got these correct went about doing them. My pre-phase going into the answer choices was that there wasn't a perfect correlation in the premises and so the author is incorrectly concluding that therefore there was no causal relationship. Is this the correct pre-phase? Is there a better one?

Admin Note:

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-58-section-1-question-11/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-62-section-4-question-19/

0

Hi everyone. I will take the LSAT on Nov 12th. I have started to prepare in August. In this short time, I finished a book and watched 7Sage videos. I did 2 PTs and got 145. I have only 10 days from now to improve my score to 153 and I need your advice. Do you think it is possible? Thank you and good luck!

1

Hi all!

Drilling logic games prior to the Nov flex test and would love to add a few more to my memorization rotation. Here are the ones I've recently slipped up on that I've been drilling:

PT 74, S2, G4

PT 75, S4, G4

PT 80, S3, G3

PT 80, S4, G4

PT 90, S3, G3

PT 90, S3, G4

Any other suggestions (especially GrpMisc and Misc games) would be greatly appreciated!

1

Hey all! I've taken the LSAT three times so far-- September 2020, Jan 2021, and October 2021 (After a 6 month brain break.) I've consistently seen improvement in my scores and for both the Jan and October tests I was consistently scoring between 171 and 174 on recent prep tests under exact LSAT flex conditions, and yet I scored a 166 and 167 respectively on the actual day of the test.

Anyone else struggle with something similar, and have any suggestions on ways to prep differently in the two weeks leading up to the November test? I think the Logic Games messed me up in the October test because that was the one section I studied less of this round because last year it was always the easiest section for me, so I'm refreshing my knowledge and re-memorizing hard LGs now.

2

Heya, I'm having some trouble with three RC questions from 91+ (9 on the first passage, and 21 and 22 on the third passage). Does anyone have any thoughts on why

For 9 and 22, I was attracted to answer choices C.

Thank you :-)

0

I worked really hard to perfect LG and I thought that I had arrived when I had a few weeks when my LG performance dropped to -0 or, at worst, -1. When that happened, I kept practising and did not become complacent. I knew not to always expect -0.

But what I didn’t expect was to almost forget how to do the games. I started going -4, -5; and that week’s PT was -10.

I don’t know what to do. Is this kind of regression normal? Am I overthinking things?

0

I selected (E) though (A) is correct.

(A) "Only Kangaroos can be released earlier than Fiesta."

(E) "Either Fiesta or Kangaroos must be released first."

How are these answers logically different?

If (A) Kangaroos is released earlier than Fiesta, then Kangaroos = 1, Fiesta = 2.

If (E) Kangaroos can be released first, ergo Kangaroos = 1, Fiesta = 2.

The outcomes of both answer choices strikes me as identical.

Someone please help!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-71-section-2-game-1/

0

Confirm action

Are you sure?