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!

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!!

Hi everyone!

I'm a consistent high 170's-180 scorer that's been tutoring for around 6 months now. I hope everyone who's currently taking the June test is doing well, and congrats for finishing!

This sesh is more for people who are targeting the August test, and is generally geared towards all skill ranges, but primarily focused on beginners. If you were on the discussion forum a few months ago, you may have seen this post before - the lesson is essentially going to be the same thing, but do stop on by if you want to do any review on formal logic or LR approaches.

I'll be holding the session on Wednesday 6/23 9PM EST. It should go on for around 1.5 hrs, or so, and I'm going to be covering formal logic in the LSAT + a systematic approach of looking at it. This will likely be review for many!

Afterwards, I'll be going through an LR section and talking through my approach, while also taking questions. If you want to follow along, please have PT20 S1 in hand.

Join the following zoom link @9PM EST Wed 6/23

https://middlebury.zoom.us/j/5528647080?pwd=TTJUM0lDV2ZxbEFvTXRjRWVXRVJEdz09

with password 686121

Conf Id 552 864 7080 also works with the same password. Thanks, and see you soon!

If you can't make the time, I'll try my best to schedule a second session, so please let me know.

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?

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!

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]"

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. :(

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.

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?

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]"

Paragraph 1:

This mostly relates to #2

The explanation video states that evidence for answer choice E lies in lines 5-8 in the first paragraph, but how I can infer that even musicians didn't know about the London Pianoforte School? Could I infer from the content of the passage that the author is in the field of music?

#4: How could I tell that the question wants me to focus on a causal relationship?

Admin note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-21-section-4-passage-1-passage/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-21-section-4-passage-1-questions/

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

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.

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?

Am I the only one who has put months into LG and is just not seeing a return on investment? I am consistently between -3 and 5 on LR, and -4 and 6 on RC, but my BEST on LG has been -6 and it's usually more like -9. LG is killing my score, and everyone said it was the easiest section to improve upon. I'm feeling very defeated at this point. Anyone been through this?

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'm sure i'm not the only one who has watched JY copy and paste master game boards and wished there was a quicker way to test rules in Logic Games on pen and paper.

My question is: does anyone know if tablets that allow you to draw on them and use copy and paste functions are allowed on test day?

I would love to find a better way to notate logic games but i don't want to purchase some kind of tablet if we are only allowed to use pen and paper for Logic games. If not, then does anyone have any advice/tips on how to organize their logic games scratch paper? Mine always end up messy and hard to follow. I often run out of room and can't keep track of what is going on. Any tips would be apreciated!

Hey y’all! I just took the LSAT Flex and wanted some input on whether I should cancel my LSAT or not.

To preface it, I’m an international student (so LSAT score matters a lot) and I have a 167 on record (in my fourth attempt) which I took in-person in Feb, 2020 in USA.

I took the LSAT Flex today in my home country and had connectivity issues which resulted in my internet connection disconnecting midway through the second section (RC). I had to end up guessing on the last few questions eventually since I ran out of time (my RCs are usually very tight time wise and the connection / disconnection thing really messed it up for me and my overall momentum for the exam).

LG went well except for again I guessed on the last 3 questions due to time constraints. My LR was good but again I messed up on time constraints on the last question.

But summing it up, since it was a sub-optimal performance on account of me blindly guessing on 8 questions at least in total which was further compounded by connectivity issues & the induced stress and considering this is my last allowed attempt so should I just cancel it? I don’t see myself improving my 167 but how bad can the consequences of canceling be (keeping the fact in mind that I’m an international student so how will a drop in score look, provided I can say that I had legit connectivity issues).

My practice score was 168 or above and blind score was 170+ in recent practice attempts.

Thank you so much! Really grateful for your input.

Hello,

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

Thank you!

Hi,

I know "These secondary substances give plants their distinctive tastes and smells." contains a causality.

But, what about this twist:

"It is these secondary substances that give plants their distinctive tastes and smells.

Does the twist means a mutual causation? meaning:

These secondary substances (--) what gives plants their distinctive tastes and smells.

Any thoughts or comments will be really appreciated!

I just did a prep test that had a lot of spacial games, like one of the earlier ones. Is this something that gets less common or more common for more recent ones? I find them kind of annoying because of how weird they are. Thanks!

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!

I had ProctorU connection issues during my June FLEX.

LR was totally normal.

RC I was interrupted 3-4 times starting halfway through reading passage 2. After about 1 minute of stop and go reading, my proctor paused the test, closed everything, and started me off again from where we were. I got through the section, but felt I never got to the level of understanding for that passage that I am used to.

LG was normal through two games, but I was interrupted by connection issues again during the last two games. I was able to answer all questions, but I probably lost 60 seconds of work time, had to guess on two questions, and didn't check my work at the end.

LSAC is offering me a retest 8 days from now. Here's why I'm so unsure of what to do:

-I've already taken the most recent 25 PTs, and I'm worried about reusing PTs or relying on older ones.

-I don't trust the FLEX setup anymore. I could encounter the same or worse connection issues again. The issues stemmed from the server side, not from my local setup.

-I am not applying this cycle, so I can retest next year if I keep this score and I am not thrilled.

This was my second sitting. I think the odds I did worse than my first sitting are low, the odds I did 1-2 points better are high, and the odds I did 3+ point better are medium. But that's just my estimate. I was shooting for a -10 on the exam.

Thanks for the insight and support. I am just a wreck over this whole thing.

Looking at the syllabus, it looks like the logical reasoning section goes on for a very long time before introducing logic games. So, can you possibly interject some logic game lessons while still in the logical reasoning section of the course? Or is it recommended to just follow the syllabus strictly as it stands?