I need help with this.

First of all, the conclusion. There are no conclusion indicators and I was confused between 2 statements to select for the conclusion. Secondly, answer choice (A) and (C), aren't they basically both saying the same thing? When there are answer choices that similar (close) in meaning, how do you determine the correct answer? Furthermore, for generalization, is there a formula for selecting answer choices? It seems that whenever I select an answer choice (narrow or broad), the correct answer is always opposite of what I pick.

Thank you.

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

Why there is no explanation videos for some of the old LR question (PR 1-15 ish) ?

Link to video expl/quick view: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-39-section-3-passage-3-questions/

My question is about the correct A/C, (A) and an incorrect one, (B).

I interpreted (A) as being far too much of a generalization, since we are only told about thermal radiation, not any other kind (with respect to the passage, we were already made aware that other kinds of radiation exist, as indicated in para. 1: gamma, X-rays, radio, heat, & light).

Had (A) said "radiation reflected by and radiation emitted by an object can be difficult to distinguish from one another," I'd have easily chosen it.

I could also buy that (A) might be a 'necessary assumption' if this were that type of question. Yet I'm struggling with understanding whether or not something that must be assumed to be true in order for certain things to make sense (i.e., why the PHYS had to choose certain types of objects when trying to accurately measure that body's radiation) should therefore be a valid, top-to-bottom inference as well. What allows us to infer something about radiation in general in any object when we are only told information about thermal/blackbody radiation and how blackbody objects relate to that?

I was also actually stuck on (B) for quite a while and hoped to hear some others' thoughts on my analysis. I acknowledge (B)'s relative "strength," compared with (A)--that was surely a red flag.

But I think (B) is ultimately faulted, not because we don't have standards for what is "nearly ideal"--after all, "little or no reflective capability" seems to give us this, but I suppose this could be interpreted as merely 'necessary' and not 'sufficient.' Ultimately, I think (B) is out because there can be an entire range of "dark" that a "dark room" could be, like pitch-black or a room with a thin ray of weak light coming in through the door crack. Since "dark" is not an absolute value, we can't be sure that an object in question in such a room isn't reflecting radiation from other things or surfaces that may be in the "dark room" as well, so we can't assume that object, especially if it weren't itself black, isn't reflecting radiation from elsewhere.

Maybe this is more a question about the passage itself, but I also thought when I was reading para. 2 again that it was reasonable to infer that the author's use of quotation marks at the first mention of "blackbody" radiation was not just use of another terminology we could interchange with "thermal" radiation, but perhaps also indicating to us that an object that could qualify as a blackbody object for an experiment need not itself be black, as long as we could guarantee that it had little-to-no ability to reflect thermal radiation coming from another source. So in other words, I thought the use of the "" could be construed as "so-called," and that it need not be literally a black-colored body in order to be a proper blackbody object, if that makes any sense.

I do acknowledge that "soot" and "black velvet" are black blackbody objects, but I saw these as examples of typical or representative blackbody objects, not necessarily as objects bearing a trait (having a black surface) that must therefore exclude something that could be "made" dark in a pitch-black room. So I guess a follow-up to this is, without reference to outside sources, would this have been a reasonable interpretation of "blackbody" radiation, in the way that the author chose to quote this? Based on para. 2, as much as a blackbody object could itself be black, could we have also reasonably interpreted that any object, whether pitch-black itself or red or green when viewed in bright light, could be a blackbody object candidate in a 100% pitch-black room where, in essence, all things are "black" and there is nothing else there in the room to reflect?

Thanks for anyone's #help on this!

Hey, I have improved my score using the 7Sage platform. But, I need a lot of improvement in my LR section and ive heard great reviews about the Ellen Cassidy book "Loophole in LSAT LR". However, I am an international student and it is not available in my country, is there any online version of the book that I could find somewhere? Would be extremely helpful, thank you 7Sagers!!

I grasp the concepts behind both -- or at least I think I do. I am having a problem truly explaining to myself the substantive difference between the two. The way I imagine Sufficient Assumption questions is that they are the invisible connector between the premise and conclusion of an argument. Similarly, MSS questions ask what would most likely be true given the argument made. In a sense, I feel as though a SA would count as a most strongly supported item from an argument. Is there a better way to understand these question types without overlapping their definitions too much?

I'm having a little trouble understanding why the answer to this question is C). If the author explicitly states at the end of the passage that, "the survey data do not establish that financial problems are the major problem in contemporary marriages," how could the answer be, C) "The conclusion drawn in Raghnall's article is inadequately justified," if the author states previously that, "Raghnall's conclusion from the survey data is that financial problems are the major problem in their marriages and an important factor contributing to the high divorce rate." My answer was A)

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

Hey guys, I'm going into my senior year at UT and I was planning to apply to law schools around November, so probably take the test in October. Well my cold diagnostic was a 134, but I really took it out of no where and in the middle of the night so a week or two later, without studying I took it again in better condition and got a 148. That made me feel a little better so I decided to get the basics on 7Sage. I've been studying for this past week (I know it's not a lot) I started on Sequence LG and I just can't seem to get them. I've printed out maybe 2 or 3 copies of every practice sets and my mind just blanks sometimes or I just don't get it. If I do good it'll be maybe 7/13ish. I really just feel pretty crappy and I would love some feedback from your experience. Thank you!

Hello,

I hope everyone's prep is going great. I'm now scoring -0 on LG. It has been a bumpy ride but I've learned a lot from the CC and other 7sagers that I'd love to share. I am free to do 1 hour slots where we can discuss LG drilling, notations, and form. We can even do questions. Below are my availabilities. Please comment below or message me if you'd like to join in. I'm open to do a group session too.

Monday 7am-8am EST

Tuesday 7am-8am EST

Wednesday 7am-8am EST

For in/out, there are basic, easy, medium, and hard sets at the bottom of this page https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-34-section-4-game-4/

Is there something similar for sequencing games?

.

Could a kind 7sager double-check my logic? After reading the argument, I thought it was well-supported. If it is in fact a poor argument, could someone point out why?

And does D weaken the argument because it provides a potential reason why leaving the asbestos alone in the buildings (not removing all of it) can be problematic? If it is true that building renovations of demolitions will 100% of the time cause the asbestos to be disturbed (and thereby cause a health risk) then if either of these things were to happen, then the government might as well remove it since not doing so only delays the inevitable

One lingering question I have: does deliberately removing the asbestos count as a renovation? And does E strengthen the argument since it provides a reason why the gov't should not remove the asbestos (the removed asbestos can still pose a health risk if it is disturbed)

Context: Asbestos... poses health risk only if it is disturbed and fibers released into environment

(Causal: disturbed asbestos causes health risk) Does this mean leaving it undisturbed renders the building asbestos harmless?

Premise: Removing asbestos from buildings disturbs it

Conclusion: Government shouldn't require removal of asbestos insulation.

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

How do you diagram answer choices B and C? And can someone explain how and why C is a valid conclusion?

A---> X---->E

S--s--A

A.) S--s--X

B

C)

D) /X--->/A

E.) E--s---S

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

hey guys! I hope your study sessions are going.

I've been struggling a lot with reading comprehension mainly just understanding the passages and then having a hard time referencing them back. Is there any advice you can give me to improve? I want to improve by 5 points on reading comp in 10-12 days. I was thinking of doing a reading comp everyday and making corrections on it to understand what I did wrong. if you could drop below some techniques that worked for you please let me know.

I am not sure what to do about logic games improvement. It is like one week I will know how to do them efficiently and then I just forget. It is extremely frustrating, especially because I have been studying for so long. At thispoint I am honestly close to giving up because I don't understand why I am struggling so much. If I don't focus on logic games I focus on logic reasoning and RC but if I focus on logic games I get worse at the others. If anyone has advice on how to move pass this please help. :(

I have been going to different forums to understand this question and i'm still having trouble with it. Idk why C is wrong. Wrong timed and in BR. Thanks!

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

Hi everyone! Since the June flex is coming up, just wanted to ask anyone and everyone if you all have tips to make sure everything goes smoothly on test day (to the extent that we can control) and/or tips to keep your cool the week leading up to it. Any guidance will be much appreciated, since this will be my first LSAT. Thanks all :)

The question gives you an initial claim as well as a principle to go with it. The stem asks for you to pick an AC that could be appropriately used as a premise for an argument that uses the principle in the stimulus. I see this as more of a pseudo-weakening question because we're trying to supply a premise for a (non-existent) counter to the original claim.

Claim: County X lowered tariff barriers because it was good for foreign companies.

Principle: To confirm that someone advantaged from a change that was made, one must show how their interests played a role in bringing about said change.

I understand why AC 'E' is correct, but in what way does this question fall into the strengthening category?

Hello guys, I have. I have been studying for over 3 months. I am okay with most of the material except necessary question type. When I get to level 3 difficulty I am 60-40, right to wrong and thus inversely to difficulty. I am having difficulty spotting the assumptions. Any tips would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance.

Does JY formally address how to tackle these types of dual passages on recent LSAT tests?

So I have been following the memory method as best I can but this strategy seems to fall flat when it comes to the more difficult RC passages. I have particular trouble on two of them and would like to know if anyone can pitch in. Both are from the Hard Reading Comprehension Problem Set 3. I've watched the explanation videos discussing the passage and questions for both but the videos glaze over several issues I had understanding the passage. I've also looked for explanations on other sites but have found them to be extremely fragmented and incomplete. I also tried study groups, both group and individual, and have found them to be about as helpful as those outside sites because we end up butting heads on the same answer choices and are unable to come to a real resolution. I have tried putting the passages away for a few weeks but got the exact same questions wrong when re-attempting them...and I've tried asking for help in the comments below the videos but have received no responses...I had my hopes up a few weeks back because I had two individuals on the forum reach out to me stating they were willing to help, but one has not responded to my messages since and the other that did respond is now permanently unavailable.

I have my own thoughts on each of the questions but have no one to check these thoughts with so I am fumbling around in the dark here so would appreciate any help

I just took the June LSAT yesterday and I was wondering if there is a deadline for the writing portion. I thought we had a year but the website just says to take it as soon as possible. I was planning on doing it over the weekend, but I just want to make sure that we are allowed to do it a couple days after the test. I get that we need the writing approved to see our score. But other than that, is there a deadline to take the writing by?

Hi all! I keep misreading rules on logic games under time pressure. If a rule says “when J is in Y cannot be in,” I’ve read it as “when J is in Y has to be in.” Really silly in retrospect but I keep doing it under time pressure. I’m taking the June test (coming up in about a week), any tips for how I can avoid this and learn to do so in T minus one week? Re-reading rule translations was a useful one that I got from discussion forums. Anything else that could help?

Hello! Can someone share how the LR section is scored on the Flex (August)? Ie. is it an average of the two LR sections or do they randomly pick one of the two to score with? Thanks!

Hello,

Is anyone offering free LR tutoring? or at a low cost?

Thank you!

I can't understand why the first (and not the last) sentence would be the MC. I note that several others posted comments with the same confusion with that question, it really was a hard question for a Q3!

If you were one of the geniuses who breezed through this one, I'd appreciate some insights!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-58-section-4-question-03/