Discussions

LSAT

New post

208 posts in the last 30 days

Hi

I have a specific question for PT 58 Q12 City Councilperson: Many City Residents.

for answer choice A, don't we negate sufficient after unless?

I understand why A is the incorrect answer choice because of "causes" when we need it to say "Purpose". But many preptest websites in their explanation do not negate ~causes debate-->~qualifies as art For answer choice A. Would you be able to explain if we ought to negate, sufficient for answer choice A? thank you

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-58-section-1-question-12/

0

Struggling to understand the "not both" rule for a logic game. We have two committees and know that P --> /Q and Q--> /P (the not both rule). Now according to the explanation, P and Q must be separated amongst the two committees. While this obviously follows the not both rule, my question is, if we fail the sufficient condition (/P or /Q), can't we have them both together in the same committee since the conditional has fallen apart?

I know this is simple but for some reason i'm stumped! any advice would be appreciated :)

0

Hello! I'm a first-time LSAT test taker and I received my email yesterday about registering for the multiple time slots for the flex this February. If you're a first-timer, does the LSAC email you your ProctorU login the day of registration? Or do they email you prior? As of now, I don't have any login information and I want to make sure that I'm prepared for tomorrow.

1

Hello I requested accommodation for quiet environment for the Feb LSAT next week. Has anyone received an email regarding this? I’ve been checking my email/spam everyday for them and nothing has been posted. There was a message on my LSAC account that I would receive something from them no later than Feb 9, which has since been deleted.

0

Hi All,

I just wanted to let everyone know that LSAC just sent out an email saying that we can sign up for the February LSAT-FLEX starting on Thursday, February 11th, at 12:00 PM EST. We will receive an email then with instructions on how to sign up.

6

Hey all. I am having trouble writing this one out. Initially, I wanted to use subscripts and fit the entities in with conditional logic chains, but I quickly got lost in determining young and old. I did some form of relative positioning using greater than, less than symbols ((,)) but this is still giving me a problem.

1) All tulip trees are older than any maples

T > M

2) A majority, but not all, of the garden's sycamores are older than any of it's maples. I wanted to diagram this like a bi conditional relationship. Is this wrong?

Most S > M

Some S ( M

(strong)3) All the garden's maples are older than any of it's dogwoods

M > D

Connecting (1) and (3)

T > M > D

Infer

T>D

Connecting (1) and (2)

T > M > Most S

T > M ( Some S

(em)Infer

T > Most S

T(---Some---) S

If I am understanding this correctly from the relationship between T, M,and D, Tulip trees comprise of the majority of the oldest trees. I kept this in mind as a reference. My problem came with translations back into english. I don't get how you can determine any of the relationships given in the answer choices, other than having worked out the stimulus in formal logic and then comparing each choice in formal logic. Even then, how do you determine old or young when you translate back into english?

I'm at a loss for this one

#help

0

What has been your most useful, in summary, tactic in improving your points in RC? I seem to be doing the standard "summarize each paragraph" as I go but maybe it is just me but it is not clicking. I feel like there is more science to it than just summarizing as you read the entire passage.

Anyone else?

2

Hi all- I was wondering if you had advice on these two question types.

I don't always get stumped with these, but when I do get questions wrong they tend to be one or the other. I get thrown off with the language when I'm down to 2 answer choices.

What has helped you all in tackling these particular questions?

Thanks in advance!

1

Stimulus (paraphrased)

Pamela: physicians in training work long, up to 36 hours, shifts and that fatigue impairs their ability to make the best medical decisions during final portions of their shift.

Quincy: Thousands of physicians have gone through this regiment with records to show that the system works. So why change now?

Though I realize I need to work in the stimulus to pick my answers, as someone who has worked shifts before, I know that your relief does not generally show up generously early. So if these physicians work up to 36 hours, they are in the long haul and that fatigue can be a very real risk to decision making towards the end.

Anyways, with everything in mind above, I was left with AC B vs C.

I picked AC C because of my influence from experience...hear me out: emergency-room patients needing continuity of physician care over the critical period after admission, generally 24 hours, would seem as though at any given crucial moment, the expectation would that a physician is able to make the best medical decisions. In the event where there is not a generous overlap between turnovers from one shift to the next, that leaves patients in critical conditions reliant on potentially fatigued physicians that are towards the end of their 36 hour shift. That is why I thought, this would be enough to counter Quincy's argument. Yes, the physicians do need to better working conditions to minimize fatigue that could impair medical decisions.

Meanwhile, AC B has me understanding it as there will be more seriously ill patients during their stay at the hospital than before. I felt like I had to draw an inference on this one. While not everyone in an emergency room may not be in a life threatening state, I guess AC B paints a better picture with more people requiring more attention and the need for best medical decisions??

Please help

0

Has anyone received any information about scheduling regarding February's LSAT? It's now under 2 weeks away, I haven't gotten any correspondence from LSAC since the day I registered, wondering what other people are experiencing. Thanks!

1

I'm on the MSS section in Logical Reasoning and so far I've just been going straight through and doing all the practice sets. However, I'm wondering if it's best to move on to a new section and then come back to the problem sets after a while to solidify the knowledge? I'm getting pretty much all of them right, and I don't want to blow through it in a day and then forget it all as soon as I move on to another section, but I don't know if the order it's designed in is the best way to go. Let me know what y'all think!

1

Hi everyone!

I was curious if anyone else struggles with this. I constantly miss between 2 and 4 on games, but almost always my misses are from the generally easier questions.

Case in point, I did PT 88's LG section and got all of questions for the last 2 games correct (both rated 5 of 5 difficulty, and includes the notorious flower game), but missed a whooping 7 questions on the first 2 games (rated a 1 of 5 and 3 of 5). This is a notoriously hard games section, so I wasn't surprised to miss so many but I can't believe they were all from the easier games.

I feel like this comes from being able to get the key inferences on hard games, but freezing on the more open ended games? I really am at a loss of what to do.

Has anyone experienced this? If anyone has recommendations on getting through this, I would really appreciate it! I've been fool proofing for a while now and nothing seems to help.

1

I am having trouble understanding why AC B is the correct answer and why AC C is not the correct answer. They both seem to weaken the argument to me. I can see that AC B directly cracks at the premise of how bird nesting for first timers are less successful than older birds and also less successful than they themselves are a year later. Why is AC C not expressing the same idea?

0

Can somebody please explain to me why AC E is correct? I got the question right just based on process of elimination, but I am not convinced as to why it is particularly the correct answer.

I understood the stimulus as the observatory director starting out with a reason why some may object to the development of the megatelescope. Then proceeding to justify its worthiness by saying that had it not been for that "research," the world would have been deprived of beneficial applications from these eminent scientists.

The part I don't understand about AC E in particular is, "worthy of comparison with that of eminent scientists." What comparison?

0

Something is really bothering me about this question, but it's not integral to getting it correct. If deceit is a quality of rottenness, that means that rottenness implies deceit, not the other way around. Which means that the first part of the argument isn't valid at all.

effective politicians must be deceitful, but that doesn't mean that they must be rotten. The conditional chain only sets off if deceit --> rottenness. For example, if sweetness is a quality of fruit, that means fruit --> sweet. If something is sweet, you can't say for sure that it's fruit.

Anyway... the question stem makes it kind of seem like it's valid which I think is why this is bugging me.

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-19-section-4-question-13/

0

Hi All - I'm looking for a paid tutor to do a few sessions with prior to the Feb 2021 LSAT. I didn't get the test score I would have like in January and feel like I'm stuck getting the same scores again and again on PTs with an equal amount of questions missed in each section more often than not.

A few hours with a LSAT expert feels needed at this point. Any recommendations you have would be greatly appreciated!

1

Confirm action

Are you sure?