Discussions

LSAT

New post

332 posts in the last 30 days

I feel silly for getting this two star flaw question wrong in timed and in BR lol. I actually pre-phrased both answers which is why I found this one so difficult.

When I read the stimulus the first issue I noted was that we have no context about what the number of fatalities mean relative to how many people climbed the mountain/are on the roads every day. Maybe there were only 200 people who attempted to climb Mount Everest over a span of 80 years, given that it’s one of the most dangerous in the world, in that sense, nearly every person who tried to climb it died! This would make it seem pretty dangerous.

What drew me to AC E is that the argument does address a generalization flaw? It concludes that 'mountain climbing dangerous have been exaggerated' and appeals to evidence based on death tolls for one of the most dangerous mountains. How does AC E not address this issue?

After analyzing the Q this the only explanation I can come up with: even if we knew numbers about other mountain fatalities, we are still lacking the relevant context about what those numbers would mean in terms of how dangerous those mountains are. (ie: how many people climbed those mountains, was it enough to make the danger factor lower or higher).

Would appreciate if someone could let me know if these thoughts are correct! I'd love to not waste time on two star flaw questions lol. I guess I'm still left confused because, in some sense, wouldn't you need to know data on other mountains to come to such a general conclusion?

Admin: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-88-section-4-question-10/

0

I took the November LSAT, did well, but not well enough considering my gpa (f in the chat) so I'm taking it again in January...but it's been a whole month and I haven't started studying again, and have literally zero motivation, and it feels like there's not enough time left to increase my score by 3 points. Helpppp

21

For strengthening questions, we know that we need to defend the argument by:

-Strengthening data in stim i.e. survey results, data, and showing that there are no mistakes with data.

-For causal:

->Eliminate alternate causes

->Prove when cause occurs so does effect

->Show that relationship is not reverse

So my question now is, for strengthening questions that include a premise booster or restate that a premise is in fact true, will this ever be the correct AC?

It seems to me that it won't, but I don't really understand why since it seems that this would fall under the first bullet for strengthening an argument. However, I have yet to see it be correct ever. I am scoring in the low 170s and when I fall for this "premise booster" AC, it's always wrong and I feel stupid for choosing it. I think it's because I don't really understand how affirming the premise's truth doesn't strengthen an argument.

Can anyone #help me understand?

0

Hi Guys , i have done all LG PT from 50-92 and was wondering how useful it is to practice older PT LG section now? Or is it best to just drill all new ones again and ai for only perfection? Thank you!!

0

Hi, I was just wondering if anyone has created a list of the LR question types and what the anticipated correct answer/ anticipated wrong answer looks like per question type. I remember coming across this type of list when I was first studying for the LSAT but cannot seem to find it anymore. I am hoping to work on mine this weekend and would love to cross-reference with another's.

5

I have a spreadsheet of LG sections I have done, and one piece of information I write down is the target time.

It seems that lately, some of the times for particular games have been changing, sometimes rather by relatively large increments (say ~1.5 minutes). Take for instance the following:

On PT23, the new and (old) times are: 5:31 (5:53), 10:40 (10:40), 10:15 (11:20), and 8:30 (7:37).

The same occurred on PT28. Game 2 is now 10:53 as opposed to ~12:40, and Game 3 is now 9:30 as opposed to ~10:45.

I understand that these times are pegged to how a particular subset (namely people who get -1 or 0 on LG) do, but I am wondering if this change is intended or if it's merely an artifact. Could @studentservice or any of the course designers chime in on this?

1

Hello Sagers,

I have been really attacking LR recently and I am able to go -0-1 in BR but my focus now is getting that timed. I am wanting to save time on easier questions/Cookie Cutter questions. Often times you hear high scorers talk about going into "hunt mode" for certain question types. For those scoring in the 170's or high 160's what questions types can you use this "hunt mode" on?

2

My logical reasoning accuracy has dropped off since entering the 80s PTs. I was averaging around -3 to -5 and now am sitting -5 to -7. I have read LR difficulty increased around the time the 80s PTs started rolling out. Does anyone have any tips on how to handle this jump in difficulty, or dip in performance? I am considering drilling higher level questions as well as really going through all of the 80s LR questions slowly during BR and afterward to try to figure out where I am going wrong. Taking the January test and currently sitting around the 163 range. Looking to get into the high 160s/low 170s/

3

Without literacy there can be no general awareness of the injustice in a society.

How do I negate this sentence?

Should I negate 'without' as well?

(me: Without literacy there can be some general awareness of the injustice in a society.)

1

So I took the October 2021 LSAT and did alright. With only about a month of true preparation I scored in the mid 150's, and was higher than any of the practice tests. Probably could have done better, but literally a few hours before the test I became very ill with the flu. I couldn't cancel or reschedule at that point so I stuck it out. Unfortunately my score was few points short for the schools that are my top choices (mainly due to pricing and being close to home). So here I go taking the LSAT again!

I just want to improve my score enough to reach 158-160, which shouldn't be too much of a problem, but my goal is to score in the mid 160's. Anything higher would be a great surprise!

Now I am just wondering how I should approach studying. Due to personal reasons I was unable to start up studying again until now. I recently discovered 7Sage because I wanted another resource to help prepare. Should I just jump into the preptests while sprinkling in the lessons, or do I grind out the lessons and quizzes and focus on the preptest towards the end with a couple weeks to go? Any advice is welcome!

1

Hi everyone,

I understand that in a Strengthen question our task is to identify an AC that will make the conclusion more likely to be true.

In a Necessary Assumption question our task is to identify an AC the argument needs in order to have a chance to be true.

My question is, are there any fundamental differences between the two?

Any input would be highly appreciated. Thank you!

2

Hey Everyone,

I just scored a 16-high on the November LSAT (with a small proctoring issue), and am signed up for the January exam, hoping that another sitting will get me a slightly higher score. I'm averaging a 170 on practice tests, and that's my goal score heading into the January exam.

My strategy to prepare for this upcoming test is to try to really master LR, since I'm consistently between -3 and -0 on this section. I've noticed that when I go -3 I make a some sort of simple mistake on an easier question I know how to do, and then I get stumped by one or two hard ones at the end. There aren't any specific question types I struggle with, and I feel like my blind review scores are at a point of mastery - there's rarely a question I can't solve. The questions that stump me at this point are just hard questions....

Does anyone have any advice on how to consistently be able to break that -0 mark? My strategy right now is to drill the back 10 questions (15-25/26) every day, since that's where a lot of my errors are.

31

Does anyone else feel like the correct answer on this one, C, attacks the premise directly? The Stem says that if we lower opera production costs so that they can be funded purely by box office tickets, we can do away with large corporate sponsorships which only play the most famous operas. AC C (for a weakener Q) states that operas cannot be funded without the help of large corporate sponsorships. Is this question one of those very rare ones where we do in fact attack the premise or am I misunderstanding something else about this question?

0

I'm literally SO confused about this question. How are you supposed to diagram this?

From my understanding, "Unless A --> NOT B" is equivalent to..."-A --> -B"....right?

So, "Unless A OR B --> NOT C" would be diagrammed like "-A OR -B --> -C".......? (I might be wrong, idk)

The stimulus says, "Unless the building permit is obtained by Feb 1 OR some of the other activities are completed in less time --> the new library will NOT be completed on schedule."

And if you diagram this, it's equivalent to...."-obtained my Feb 1 OR -less time --> -completed on schedule...".....? But this seems to be wrong, according to the answer key.

Can someone explain to me how adding more than one sufficient condition to an "unless" statement changes how it should be diagrammed?

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

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-60-section-3-question-03/

0

Hi,

Could someone kindly help me understand why/how A is the answer for this question if my interpretation below is incorrect?

I got this wrong. I picked C, but now I think I see why A is right and why C is is wrong. Is C wrong because it is merely stating a fact stated by the stimulus - that there will be more males to x # of females at both lakes therefore it's not some we are 'inferring'?

And, is A right because given the sex ratio information re: females and males in the stimulus, we know there will always be a lower percentage of adult males at Western than at Eastern Lake?

Any help is appreciated!

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

0

Hi all

I’m looking for any tips for memorizing the logical indicators (group 1, 2, 3, 4 and what to do with each of them). Does anyone have any tips? I tried Flashcards and electronic Flashcards but I’m just not a memorization person.

1

Hi everyone!

I just did a full LG section and was able to get through games 1-3 with almost 3-4 minutes under the recommended time. The fourth game, however, took me 7 minutes over the target time, which I felt was way too long. However, I finished the section within 35 minutes and got -1 on the entire section.

I will most definitely review this fourth game, but Im curious to know if this timing in game 4 means that there is a crack in my understanding? I know that on the actual test day, we can't know how long it took (or should have) taken us to do each game, but I am not sure what to make of me taking over 7 minutes the target time but still getting -1 over the entire section.

Would love to know yall's thoughts!

0

hey guys I am having some issues understanding some of the Core Curriculum especially logic. I would appreciate if someone can help thank you.

0

Hey everyone,

I am having some difficulty with the five star questions in logical reasoning sections. Often times, these are the only questions that I get wrong on a section. On one hand I suppose it’s good that I’m getting the 1 to 4 star questions consistently correct, however, I’m getting pretty irritated haha

The question types are across-the-board. There aren’t really any specific questions that I do worse or better on when it comes to five star questions.

What is your preferred method for improving this?

Thanks!

0

Confirm action

Are you sure?