Any suggestions?

7/8 LR mistakes on my last PT were overconfidence errors (didn't flag the question and answered in less than 1 minute). Caught all but 4/7 of these relatively quickly on BR. Any tips on how to overcome this. I don't think it was my nerves on this exam (though that has been a factor in the past).

I typically make 1-2 overconfidence errors per PT but this PT 82 was particularly brutal, I guess.

Trying to figure out a timing strategy without a lot of luck...

Hi all - I'd really appreciate your help on understanding the argument in this question.

I get the gap in this question is that just because first doctrine states that "all historical events must be explained in economic factors" doesn't mean that historical events are explained only in economic factors.. that's why A is the correct answer for this question.

However, explanations in other forums state that second doctrine is rightly mistaken because it's apparently stating that all historical events are explained by psychological factors and psychological factors only. But I don't really understand how this is inferred from the statement in the stim - "The second doctrine attempts to account psychologically for all historical events." Does "attempts to account psychologically for all historical events" infer that historical events are accounted only through psychologically?

Does anyone have suggestions for how to foolproof LG and stay organized without printing the games out? How do you keep track of which ones you've done/need to go back and re do? How do you take new games while also redoing old ones?

Has anyone tried LSAT Wizard's logic game methods? and how do you feel about incorporating that with JY's method? I recently watched LSAT Wizard's videos and I feel like it is quiet helpful but also feel like I'm even more confused on how to learn LG

Hi,

Can anyone explain why the answer here is A and not E?

I have major trouble understanding why A is right when it doesn't seem to explain why the 52% of people who like the candidate continue to like the candidate-- it only talks about the people who don't like the candidate.

Likewise, E at least seems like it could apply to both groups of people since the people who liked the candidate believed the candidate's excuse while the people who didn't like the candidate may not listen to his excuse.

Any #help would be appreciated!

Thanks!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-63-section-3-question-26/

Can I think of NA questions as must be true/mss?

I've recently been working on Parallel Flaw questions and have realized that I am struggling with linking up conditional statements. When I am given a statement such as:

All dogs are happy. If you are happy, you will live a good life.

The presence of conditional indicators allows me to recognize that the statement above uses conditional logic. Beyond that, there is also a "link word" that allows for me to chain these two statements together. The "link word" is "happy."

However, I have started to come across stimuli that use conditional logic, but do not have an outright pronounced "link word." An example of this is PT32-Section4-Q21. The stimulus provides us with the following:

Premise 1:

Experimental psychology requires application of statistics

experimental psychology -----> application of statistics

Premise 2:

You can't understand such application without training

understand application -----> training

In the video explanation JY seemingly seamlessly uses logic to link together the two premises.

I am struggling to see how these two premies can be linked up. I thought application of statistics and understanding of statistics were two distinct ideas.

There have been a couple other questions where I have run into a similar issue. I think that for me there is a disconnect between the context of the sentence and the conditionality. I would really appreciate some insight regarding this particular question, and just a general idea of what I can do to get better with this gap in my understanding of conditionality.

Thanks in advance!

Hey guys,

I'd love to get some thoughts on different ways to go about practicing RC. I feel like I'm not getting tons of progress from just practicing over and over. Do you have any advice to offer me in regards to practicing for this section of the test? Timed vs. Untimed. Reading other things. Breaking things down. IDK, just trynna keep things fun and fresh!

#help

Thanks

I have gone through the course and watched all the LG videos and done most of the problem sets but I'm still unclear on a few things. I know this stuff is basic but I am really not smart.

So say there is a rule in a sequencing game if x is 3rd then y is 5th. Does that mean is y is 5th, then x has to be 3rd? I keep thinking the answer is no. Or if it is an in and out game. If X is in, then Y is in. I know the contrapositive is if X is out, y is out but what about if I only know y is in. Does that mean x has to be in as well or can y be in by itself.

I really don't get lawgic and can't follow when JY starts writing formulas. I'm sure his explanations are great, my brain just cannot process them. It doesn't work right. I've got extra time accommodations for the actual test but I still don't come close to finishing LG.

Why was this B, not C?

Hello,

I have been mastering the LR and LG sections but my main issue is with RC ! Can't manage to get less than 9-10 mistakes per section.

I need tips and help please !!!!

I ended up going with answer choice C and quickly skimmed through D and E.

I am having a hard time understanding why E is a better answer choice than C.

Thanks in advance!

Can someone please explain to me why AC (D) is the correct choice; I'm stuck.

Hi everyone,

Here is a question, about weakening a claim, from my error journal:

Claim: Organic factors contribute to mental illness.

(A) the claim fails to consider that mental illnesses are only manifestations of organic factors.

(B) the claim fails to consider that any change in organic factors manifests itself as a change in mental condition.

Would you mind sharing your analysis of whether each of the choices is correct or not?

My specific issues:

Thank you very much for your time!

I'm scheduled to take the LSAT Flex in August and I had been doing ok on LR, missing 4-5 questions per section. I decided to do some practice tests in the 80s and I've been missing anywhere from 8-12 questions per section which has tanked my score. Now I'm freaking out about August's exam and I don't know what to do. Why did this happen??

Hi guys,

I recently noticed that I continue to go -3 and -4 on each LR section either untimed or timed and BR'ed. These questions tend to be 4 and 5 star questions. Since a few months ago, I used up a few PTs (43 - 49) doing untimed work to increase my focus in reading carefully the question stem, stimulus, and answer choices. I noticed that prior to this, I was slacking off on being explicit with what the assumptions used on the argument is, and prephrasing the answer choice.

In this regard, I definitely made improvements (went -5 and -6 per each LR section previously). I do not gloss over words/sentences as much and feel more attuned to important details. But still, I am still getting -3 and -4 wrong on each LR section, which is discouraging. My goal is to go -1 per LR section timed, so 0 untimed.

I plan on using the 7Sage Analytics to identify any recurring question types from PTs 43 - 49, revisiting the CC for those question types, and making drill packets from PTs 7 - 49 on those question types.

What do you think about my approach? Would you recommend that I continue to do untimed work as I mentioned above, or continue doing what I was doing and use up a few more PTs (50 - 55) for untimed LR sections as well? I don't think it's a good idea to go back to timed LR sections with BR at the end, seeing that my untimed score is not good enough.

Thanks for your input!

Is answer choice E incorrect because of the second half that reads, "unless manufacturers would reap large benefits..."

Also, I didn't really understand why C is the correct answer here. C seems to imply that the manufactures are in fact being deceptive which is what the consumer advocate is trying to prove. I tagged the first sentence in the manufacture's dialogue as the conclusion for the manufacture, and again answer choice C seems to go against this.

I would really appreciate any help with trying to figure out where I went wrong.

I have been consistently writing down explanations of LR questions I got incorrect (and many I got correct) in an attempt to improve my speed and understanding. I’ve been working on this for a over month, and I just cannot seem to finish a section on time with accuracy. I almost always score -4 going 5 minutes over time (working through the 50’s and 60’s PT sets). Ideally, I would like to be scoring -2 with a few minutes to spare, and I’m concerned that I won’t be able to get there in time for the October LSAT. Any tips or advice would be highly appreciated 😔

So I'm at the point in my studies where my BR score for LR (both sections) is consistently very low (-1, -1, -4, -2, -2) on my last 5 PTs but my timed score has lagged significantly (-6, -5, -7, -4, -7).

Part of what has been frustrating me is that I typically finish an LR section with plenty of time to spare (10-5 minutes left) but it just seems that I am never able to allocate those last minute effectively - I will confirm a wrong AC or two (that I'll then get right in BR w/o the time pressure) I'll go back to questions that I got correct that I probably shouldn't be double-checking, etc.

I'm aiming for low-mid 170s so I don't expect my BR to become my timed score and I'm not shooting for perfect either but I'ld like to get a better grasp on how to allocate the remaining time that I have bought with being so efficient on the 1st round.

I'm spending this week on drilling full LR sections in the 70s (already done these so I'm not burning fresh PTs in case any one is wondering). I'm trying to track 1) how much time I have left at the end of the section 2) how many wrong ACs I end up switching to right (and vice-versa). Should I also be tracking how many questions I unnecessarily go back to? What else should I be tracking?

In addition, I'm continuing to drill weaknesses that I found and really 'full-proof' out questions that I missed the day before to cover any gaps and familiarize myself with the feel of the newer questions.

Any thoughts? How have other people improved this?

I feel so defeated. Someone please help me with RC. I cannot improve no matter what I do. Its holding me back from getting a good score and I am losing hope. Any tips are greatly appreciated

I have been struggling with PSA questions. I am averaging -3 on LR section and most of the time the questions I get wrong have been PSA. So far, I've been through the PSA lessons provided by 7Sage and have seen some improvement, but it still seems like something just isn't clicking. Its hard to pin-point what I'm doing wrong in terms of approach and would really appreciate any insight on others' approaches.

Can someone explain why answer choice D would not weaken this argument? Is it because it directly attacks the premise stated that businesses value their profits? Is saying they treat the "fines" as a business expense essentially saying they do not value their profit because they are not remedying the problem? #help

I really do not understand why A is the correct answer instead of B, could someone help me out?

Hey guys, I've been studying the LSAT for super long (it's actually super brutal). I feel very confident with the content when it comes to LR. The thing that screws me currently is (i) timing, and (ii) SA/PSA under timed conditions because I find it super hard to use lawgic under time constraints. On a good day I would miss 7 for LR, but usually I'll miss around 10 (I don't usually make it to the end questions, I've thought of using timing techniques but I feel like I lose track of time when I think I might be close to solving a question where I end up spending around 2.5 mins on it and it could still be wrong).

If you can lmk! Thanks in advance!

Hello 7sagers,

Follow my analogy here- (hope it’s clear enough). If the corona virus is among the most common ills, doesn’t that mean that most people have it? The argument tells me if I take aspirin, I would be in better health but that’s not true because while I could be covid free from taking an aspirin, it doesn’t mean I’m in better health if my diarrhea is still persisting.

I chose C because preventing or reducing the severity of covid has nothing to do with the flu or blood pressure, all of which are common.

7sagers, Let’s discuss:

I don’t understand B over C because the fact that the corona virus is common would mean that millions of people in the US alone have it. The explanation video helped me under B but I'm still struggling with why C is wrong.

That's is how I attacked the question. Well not necessarily attacked, considering I got it wrong.

I’d would love to hear how you interpreted it. If the stimulus is saying it’s among the most common ills, won’t that mean that most people have it?