This has tripped me up on one or two questions in the past because I think I'm carrying my own sense of what a generalization is. How would you say that LSAT defines this term?

Hi all!

I feel like I'm stuck in a rut with my studying. I've been FP LG which has been really helpful, but with LR I find myself scoring worse than I did when I first started studying.

What are some specific actions/ methods you used in seeing increases in LR? How did you realize what wasn't working and what did you do to get past it? How does LR studying look for you? Do you take PTs, drill, BR?

I hope to get some inspiration and guidance on how to see consistent improvements. Thanks in advance!

For employee working there from 1-4 year they have 3 weeks paid leave.

Half of 3 is 1.5 which is less than 2. How is (A) correct?

Reading Comp is my worst section by far because I can get lost in the complexity or density of the reading and lose too much time or I can struggle in other ways. What advice does anyone have for doing well on reading? Any secrets I need to focus on to improve?

I am having an incredibly hard time trying to digram the logic.

I diagramed the third sentence as follows:

/Profit Making ----> subsidy support (outside control)

The last sentence was the hardest for me to diagram. "No one will subsidize honest journalism"

No= G4=negate, necessary

Two ideas:

willing to subsidize??

honest journalism

honest journalism ----> /willing to subsidize

I think part of my confusion with this last sentence is trying to figure out what the two distinct ideas are.

I am also having a hard time trying to figure out how the third sentence and fourth sentence are linked together. I thought the correct answer was A.

Thanks in advance!

Planning on taking the August Flex. Really want to improve on LG. How did you guys finish the LG Curriculum section? Did you foolproof each game 10 times in a day? If so how long was it since you seen improvements?

Please help!! I feel like I don't have structure when it comes to finishing the lessons for LG and practicing before August test date.

Has anyone noticed the "Some...." as a cookie-cutter trap answer choice for tougher strengthening/weakening questions?

(Disclaimer - I don't think this would work all of the time; and would actually love to look at counterexamples if anyone has any). But I think it might merit some additional attention/scrutiny if you are going to select an AC to strengthen or weaken an argument and all you have in your pocket is a some statement - kind of like going into battle with a BB Gun.

I think the reason for this is that some statements are inherently weak (or NOT powerful, in Loophole terminology). Some could be 1 out of 100 or 4 out of 2 trillion and unless the conclusion is conditional claiming that all As are Bs then its probably won't do much to claim that some As are /Bs. I could see this being particularly the case for causal arguments when there are potentially multiple and countervailing factors at play (as there almost always are).

For example, prolonged exposure to sun without sunscreen is known to cause skin cancer. If we wanted to weaken this argument for example, "some people who go to the beach everyday and never wear sunscreen will NEVER develop skin cancer". Well of course! There are always going to be a couple outliers but that doesn't wreck the fact that one thing (prolonged exposure to the sun without sunscreen) causally contributes to another thing (skin cancer).

I also think that the same reason that some statements make them incorrect (they are indefinite, vague and inherently weak) also make them appealing. After all, some could mean 99.99% but that requires the additional (and unwarranted) assumption.

Can anyone else validate this reasoning or rip it apart with an accompanying explanation? :)

Hi everyone, I hope your long weekend is going as good as mine with all this studying going on (simply fantastic). -_-

Just a bit of background, I've completed the Powerscore Bibles and am now going through the 7Sage core curriculum. When going through Sufficient and Necessary conditions, I had a quick question: how would you "draw" these two sentences?

No dog is funny (https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/basic-translation-group-4-flashcards/) - Group 4

There is no reward without hard work. (https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/basic-translation-group-3-flashcards/) - Group 3

Based on the CC lesson, "No" is the identifier for the first sentence, meaning we take either of the ideas (dog or funny), negate it and make it a necessary condition.

Based on the CC lesson for the second sentence, "Without" is the identifier for the second sentence, meaning we take one of the ideas "no reward" or "hard work", negate it and make it a sufficient condition.

My question is, why is the idea in the second sentence "no reward" but the idea in the first sentence just "dog"? Why doesn't the "no" negate the dog as well, just like it negates the reward, making it "no reward"?

Sorry if I confused you guys. :( Thanks so much!

Any tips for the last month to help improve LR section? I seem to be making the same mistakes on timed PT and I think it is because of time pressure and not the difficulty of question because I have a solid understanding of all question types. If anyone has any advise to do in the next month to get more comfortable by test day that would be hugeeee help.

Hi 7sagers! I'm currently averaging -1~-2 in LR. Recently I've been reviewing my old PTs. I think it would be great if I have someone asking me questions so that I can review my fundamentals. And also I hope this can help someone who cannot afford a tutor. I plan to do this tutoring once or twice a week until August LSAT. Shoot me a message if you're interested! Please briefly tell me your score range in LR, your weakness, PTs you've done, your availability, how long you've studied for the test ,and whether you have finished CC or not. I live in GMT+8 (ET+12hr), but we can definitely make this work. Thanks!

I was stuck between answer choices C and E, and ultimately with C.

Conclusion: Mayor's claim that the turnaround time for patients in "top priroty emergencies" has gone down this year, is a misrepresentation.

P1: Definition of "top prirotiy emergencies" is different this year than it was the year before.

Why is E the better answer here? C is acknowledging that the mayor's definition of "top-priority emergency" is erroneous. I feel like E is simply restating the premise that tells us that emergencies used to include gunshot wounds and electrocutions. Did I misinterpret this?

Would greatly appreciate any insight.

I diagrammed the stimulus as follows:

Premise 1: universities moral and intellectual----> /best selling books are frivolous

Premise 2: best selling books are frivolous

Conclusion: /universities moral and intellectual

With this diagram I was able to quickly eliminate answer choices A and B. However, I really struggled to eliminate C, D, and E. Nonetheless, I struggled with finding a reason to eliminate C and D.

C.) The stimulus tells us that at university bookstores the only publication that sells better than Gossip Review is TV Today. I thought that part of the stimulus allowed us to conclude that most people are purchasing TV Today or Gossip Review.

D.) The stimulus tells us that many people who attend this country's universities are failing their moral and intellectual responsibilities. I found this answer choice to be as equally attractive as E. I get that this answer choice is focused on the people who attend the university and the stimulus is placing a focus on the universities as a whole, but I think it's a logical assumption to say that the students are failing since they are a part of the university as a whole. If the university as a whole fails then so do all the other groups of people who make up the university.

Since I was able to use conditional logic for this question, should I just look for the conclusion that best matches and move on?

I would greatly appreciate someone's input in trying to figure out why C and D are wrong.

Thanks in advance!

I am really struggling with this question and I honestly think it's because I may have misunderstood the stimulus. My understanding is that milk, the final product that we see at the store, requires the use of a bottle and raw milk. The bottler is the person who purchases raw milk from farmers and uses it to create the jug of milk that we see at the grocery store. The stimulus proceeds to tell us that complaints about the bottlers pulling up the prices tend to happen when the milk bottler has had to purchase raw milk from farmers, at a higher price than usual. The author of the stimulus uses this to show that it's not the milk bottler's fault that the price of milk at the grocery store has gone up, but rather the blame should be on the farmer. If the farmer hadn't pulled up the price of raw milk then the bottler would not have had to pull up the price of their final product (i.e. the milk jug at the store).

The word "markup" was something I interpreted to mean revenue, not sure if that's actually what was meant by that. From that I drew out:

Scenario 1: Price of raw milk goes up

Price of milk at grocery store:

Goes up

Markup:

small

Scenario 2: Price of raw milk falls

Price of milk at grocery store:

Goes down

Markup:

greatest

I ended up choosing answer choice D, but it was not the accredited answer. I would greatly appreciate if someone could read through my interpretation of the stimulus and help me figure out where I went wrong.

Thanks in advance!

I studied full time for three months and scored 160 after a PT Avg of 167 and BR 171. The official score was just a point above my diagnostic. I really believe I can break 170, but this is pretty disappointing. Should I re-take in October or November?

Still cannot believe my score -- Thank you so much JY (you're a beast) and the 7sage community. Anything is possible with 7sage!

Hello everyone,

I am currently doing some LR problems and I've had a recurring problem. When writing out conditional statements, I am sometimes confused whether a subject is part of the conditional statement or it is a subset of another item. This is best illustrated in an example. On preptest 21, LR 2, section 3 question 22 the stim states: "Anatomical bilateral symmetry is a common trait..." When doing the problem I wrote: ABS --> C. However, in his explanation JY simply put C, rather than the conditional relationship. So how do I know when to write a conditional or when to indicate a trait/subset by itself (ABS is common = C - ABS vs ABS--->C)?

Thank you in advance for your help.

Hello. I'm having trouble wrapping my head around why the correct answer choice is A. The second sentence of the stimulus says that NO OTHER ORGANISM has a greater resistance to cancer than sharks. Answer Choice A states that "no organism resists cancer better than sharks do, but some resist cancer as well as sharks." This is true according to the analysis given for the second sentence in the stimulus, and therefore it does not match the question stem criteria of selecting an answer that could be true EXCEPT.

Consequently, I don't understand why answer choice B is incorrect.

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-28-section-1-question-11/

I don't want to bomb the October one and have to wait until the spring to take again. Does LSAC frown upon people who take it more than twice?

Should I take full tests or should I isolate Logic Game sections and fool proof after. I am currently getting consistent 15/23 questions right for LG and want to get to mastery by my October Test. I tried drilling a few sections this week and it somewhat helped but I don't know how to get to mastery. Any advice would help and I am sure many have asked such questions before. Thanks!

Hi all, posting for advice on admissions and LSAT retake. I signed up for June and July tests, scored a 166 on June and was disappointed to get back a 165 on July today. I really had hoped for at least a 168 on July, but here we are.

My question at this point is whether I should keep studying and take one more time in October and apply as soon as those scores come back or if I should apply with my 166 on first day applications open and retake in October once I have already applied? I know that I can get at least into that high 160s range from PTs and I have been consistently BRing 173-174 on my PTs before July. For reference, I have above a 4.0 GPA and solid resumé and would really like to shoot for T14 (maybe with at least a partial scholarship) or a little lower ranked with full ride.

I took the July test and today saw that there was "Score validity review" under the special notes column for the July test on my LSAC page. Does anyone know what that means?

I contacted LSAC and am waiting for their reply. I would really appreciate if anyone could give me some idea in the meantime. Thank you!

I am struggling with MSS Question types. Any tips?

Hi Guys,

I am coming back to 7Sage and law school prep after a almost 5 years away, so I am out of the practice studying as well as with the current news about the test. I apologize in advance if this topic has been discussed 8 billion times.

What is replacing the Logic games and when is this happening? Have there been any major changes to this or any other section since the ruling to take the games away permanently?

If anyone has any advice as to what I should focus on, or any areas that are not as helpful anymore, is much appreciated.

Hey fellow 7Sagers,

I'm having some trouble understanding this question.

Here is how I diagrammed it:

CR ----->/LW

SRO---->LW

(and then I diagrammed the last premise)

L (--S--)CR

SRO -----> /L

I hooked them up by taking the contrapositive of the first premise: SRO ------> LW -------> /CR (--S--)/L

But ultimately, I wasn't able to find the right answer. And JY says that we're supposed to disregard the last premise—Some lawyers are not cattle ranchers L(--S--)CR. How am I supposed to know that I should completely ignore this premise and why? This was the sentence that kept me from getting this question right! I need someone to clarify this concept, please!

Cheers!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-18-section-2-question-02/

Hey! I've gotten a lot out of this discussion forum, so I thought I'd do my part and help some peeps out. I made a Logic Games Log to track progress... I have been using this along with a method shared by another 7 Sage user to increase my proficiency on LG.

The Method:

*With each attempt, use this log to track your time, questions missed, and thought process.

I hope this helps!!!

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1E05DctHMKGabrygoAXcemGB8y7wBHBf_/view?usp=sharing