In a sufficient assumption question (and also, I could imagine the scenario w/ "which of the following would justify" questions or strengthen questions), if the stimulus contains a set of statistics, can the answer be "the stated statistics are correct"? It seems like this can never be the answer. I know that premises can't be directly attacked in a weaken question. So it seems that directly affirming a premise (and adding no other info) wouldn't be something that the testmakers would do on the reverse side.

In other words, does a necessary assumption of an argument strengthens the argument? For example, if a stimulus argue that environmental factors caused X instead of genetics, would an answer choice like “environmental factors can sometimes cause X,” which I think is a NA, be strengthening the argument? I honestly think it does, though not much, since it shows that the argument is possible. And if it does, do all NA strengthen it’s pertaining arguments?

Would anyone be available/willing to help me diagnose what I need to work on in RC? I'm stuck at around -6 and trying to bring the average down in the last month before the October test.

Thanks!

Hey all, I was wondering how people are going about writing notes or low resolution summaries for RC on a flex format. It's not possible to type any notes alongside the passage, is it? I've only seen the highlight ability, which I do find useful. I also don't have a stylus or stylus-friendly laptop.

I've been scoring increasingly high on my practice tests lately, driven mostly by the fact that I've managed to get my Logic Games errors down to zero. However, looking at my analytics, I've realized that many of the tests I've taken recently have had LG sections rated only one or two stars out of five for difficulty. I'd like to practice on more difficult LG sections so I know that I'm not just taking easy sections, but I can't seem to find any (unless I'm mistaken, you cannot view the difficulty rating of a section until after you've taken it).

Does anyone have any recommendations for which tests have the hardest Logic Games sections? It seems as though the vast majority of these tests have very easy games, and I don't think that this is due 100% to my skills increasing. Are there LG sections rated 4 or 5 on the difficulty scale? Is there a way to see difficulty ratings before taking the test? Thank you very much for any help you can give me.

Fairly new to 7Sage and still trying to figure everything out so bear with me. I just finished a LR (main point/main conclusion) problem set I created on my own and was looking for video explanation of the ones I got wrong after BR. Can I find that anywhere? Thanks!!

Specifically looking for PT1 S3 Q13.

I have written the August LSAT and am on the fence on how I feel. I’ve read up on cancelling your score, but I’m wondering if anyone has perspective on cancelling a score and doing the test again vs keeping your score and taking the test again.

If one takes it again and improves, does it matter if the first time shows a lower score versus a cancelled score?

Can someone please share an example of using the logical indicator "or" from the negate sufficient group? Thanks!

I noticed that JY sometimes chains certain "some" "most" and "all" statements for MBT LR questions. Does anyone know where he explains the logic? It mostly makes sense but i want a better explanation than just winging it.

Hey, whats up.

I am taking the LSAT in October and reading comprehension is by far my worst section. I could use any tips that has helped you so I could try and see if it helps me. I am generally getting -10 to -13 per section. I would love to get that down before I actually take the exam.

Thanks

Hi everyone,

I am feeling really discouraged. My diagnostic was a 145 and did not change substantially until I did 7sage. Last week, I got a 156, which was AMAZING to me, and I couldn't believe it. Now my score has only gotten worse: I got a 154, then a 149, and today I got a 147. This has all been in the span of a week or so. I'm very sad and I was planning on taking all of Friday off to relax, and do some drills today in my problem areas. Saturday is August LSAT Day.

What do you guys think? Is this a good idea? Any words of advice or encouragement? It's hard to not feel hopeless. I'm really hoping to get into the 150s so I don't have to go through this again, and I think that is what is making me so anxious.

EDIT: Would like to note that I have essentially cherrypicked my needs in the CC, because I definitely did not have time to do all of it, as much as I would have loved to. I started using the LSAT Trainer and studied very inconsistently, but it wasn't until July that I started really picking up on concepts and stuff. I know that my situation is less than ideal, but I think it's important for the full context to be here too. Please don't be harsh, as I know what I should have done.

I've been going over correlation causation and it's closely related cousin phenomenon hypothesis arguments and I realized a very important distinction. Phenomenon hypothesis (hereafter known as PH) deals with cause and effect whereas correlation causation deals with cause and effect over time. Here's why this is important:

Nicole Hopkins has a great webinar in the 7sage archives about weakening and strengthening arguments. She says we can strengthen arguments by showing more data that A->B, block an alternate explanation C->A&B, or block no relation between A and B. I'd like to additionally state that chronology can impact an argument as well. If we say A->B, staying that A did indeed come before B strengthens the argument. If B came before A how could A->B?

The important concept I realized was that in many PH questions the above methods don't cut it. In 70.1.6, 70.1.12, and 80LR1.23, we need to use a different approach: if cause, we want to see the effect. If no cause, no effect.

The arguments say "here's a phenomenon, here's my hypothesis." This is implying a casual relationship between A and B. But if I show the effect with no cause, what happens to the hypothesis? It's weakened. If I show your cause with it's effect, this strengths. Too, "no cause no effect" is a very subtle way of strengthening an argument.

Hi there,

This will be my 3rd time writing the LSAT, I switched to 7sage in the middle of studying for my second exam and love it, it has been way more descriptive/helpful. I have a question; visually writing down the SA + Pseudo questions does not help me (translating it into lawgic). In fact, I find it takes me more time and confuses me way more. I usually can get about 50-80% of the questions right (depending on the day) by just working it out in my head and eliminating answer choices. Is this bad? Should I re-do the whole translations portion of the course to better understand it going forward? I know some people have their reservations on this...Any suggestions would help! PS. I am aiming for the November exam as I was waitlisted at 4 schools (now 3 as one school emailed me and advised they are full).

Regardless of the overall difficulty of an LR section, I seem to always miss exactly 2 or exactly 3 questions. Easiest, hardest, doesn't matter. Even more frustrating is that one of them is usually a level 3 difficulty, and something I get immediately on BR and wonder "why the hell did I choose X over (correct) Y?"

In general, these incorrect choices are usually the result of me reading a convincing (but incorrect) answer choice wrong. I usually know in the moment that something is off, but I don't figure out the "why" in time.

How can I eliminate these fringe misreads that are keeping me from a higher score? What internal monologues can help me read answer choices correctly when I'm doubtful of my first interpretation?

I didn't realize it at the time, but what I considered to be my proactive, go-get-em study technique of making my own problem sets of Logic games to practice has now spoiled almost ALL of the practice tests I have access to! Doing the games in the test, I keep coming across ones that I have done before. Beating myself up right now, I wish I had thought to check if they were the games from the Ptests I was going to take in the future. It's still good practice, but I don't think my scores are genuine. Not sure what to do :(

I've done this problem twice on two separate occasions, and predicted the wrong assumption both times. When I read the stimulus, I see a gap between the speed of the animal and the info. we're given in the premises, which is the energy afforded by surface area and the energy needed to be overcome by the weight. Could someone please tell me why this isn't a relevant assumption?

I always seem to crash and burn (-7/8) on that.

Any ideas on what I should be doing?

So far I have been doing drills from easiest to hardest, then focusing the strategies off all question types.

Thank you!

I've never fully understood why one LR section of the LSAT has 25 questions and the other 26, but I always find myself pressed for time on the 26 question version. Often, it seems like those questions aren't any easier to make up for the additional time constraint. I understand the questions on the FLEX are supposed to be 'balanced', but do we know if there is going to be 25 or 26 questions on the section? Thanks!

Hi there,

I'm at the point of my study where I'm drilling LR questions by type.

I am starting with Must be True/MSS because they're foundational.

What should I follow up with?

Thanks

Hi,

I have had fluctuating results on LR. I have been consistently scoring at the 166 level. I have broken into the 170s twice, and those times I managed -1 to -3 on LR. However, I have tests where I miss around 9 on on the LR and it really drags my score down [on BR I get almost every question I flag correct (scoring 170-174)]. I have been consistently scoring -3 to -4 on RC and -0 on LG.

So far, I have taken 14 PT's (36-50). If anyone would please share what specific steps they took to achieve consistency on LR I would really appreciate it. I am hoping to utilize your advice to make the most of PT's 51-89. It feels like I've hit a plateau for weeks now and it's incredibly frustrating.

Best Regards,

Noah

Gosh, this question was hard.

Can anyone explain why B is not a weakener?

I thought B weakened because, if most people in the painting did resemble real people from history, then if we follow the author's logic, this would mean that any of those people could also be the painter of the painting.

Any #help would be appreciated!

Thanks!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-88-section-2-question-24/

Could anyone elaborate what the difference between the two types are? I cannot for the life of me figure it out! Would appreciate greatly for any help :).

Hi everyone. I need some advice on reading comp and whether or not I should do the core curriculum. I'm doing fine in PTs and BR. I get -3 at most and then BR -0. I have no issues with timing either. So do I go for the "don't fix it if it ain't broke" approach, meaning things are ok so let things be. Or should I go over the core curriculum because there are benefits to new approaches and I will probably pick up some useful tips (maybe at this point only very marginally useful).

The issue is, it will be quite time consuming to go over RC CC, time I can invest in firming up LR and LG. My goal is -0 in RC and I think I can do that on my own, whereas LR and LG definitely need more practice. Please advise!

Though these questions don't appear on every PT I tend to go 50/50 on whether or not I get these right. Sometimes the right answer speaks to me, other times I have no clue; either way it's pure intuition and I'm curious if anyone has some advice for how to approach these questions more systematically?

Are there any types of cookie cutter wrong / right ACs?

I'll throw out something that I ~think~ I picked up from looking at one of these questions - an attractive, though albeit wrong, AC is one that is internally coherent (makes sense) but goes off in a tangential direction.

I was making a note to myself that in grouping games, if they tell you there are X amount of groups and they don't give any rules regarding who can go in which group number, then I shouldn't worry about making game boards based on if M can go in groups 1, 2, or 3 because it doesn't matter, as long as it isn't with P.

Don't let the group numbers interfere with your game.

Get it? Game?

Where are my New Yorkers at who would get this?