Hi,

I have trouble understanding answer choice B. What is it like to be ambiguous in an LR stimulus? When I was doing this question under timed, I thought ambiguous notion of knowledge was the author does not state whether her example of some Greek philosophers' opinion is right or wrong. So I chose B. Even after watching the explanation video, I still have trouble understanding why B is wrong and what would a stimulus be like if the correct answer choice were B. Any #help would be appreciated!

Link to the question: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-c2-section-3-question-18/

Hey fellow 7Sagers,

I have two quick questions for y'all!

I'm having troubles understanding why JY translates answer answer choice A—that ends up being the right answer—like this:

MPH ----> LS

moreLS = moreH

When answer choice A states "Most people need the love and support of others; without it, they become depressed and unhappy"

I translated it like this "/Love&support --m---> depressed&unhappy," using "without" group 3 translation negate + sufficient. Also, why not inserting most into the arrow?

Cheers,

https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/experimental-psychology-pf-question/?ss_completed_lesson=1142

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-32-section-4-question-21/

Hi everyone.

I just did PT 2 game 4 and got crushed by the amount of inferences that were needed in order to figure out the game. Does anyone have some games similar to this in mind? I think this is where my focus should go.

Thanks!

Now that you can use mechanical pencils on the LSAT Flex, I thought I would give some advice here as someone that is a self proclaimed mechanical pencil nerd. I have used many in practicing for the LSAT and have to give my #1 recommendation to the Delguard ER . It is 0.5 MM and has a mechanism that prevents the lead from breaking (up to three clicks). It has saved me all kinds of time and frustration. The Delguard ER is great for smaller hands, and the regular non ER model is still great, but thinner. All around it's a great pencil. The eraser is OKAY, so I would recommend a mono black foam stick eraser, but that's your personal preference.

Hi everyone! I hope you are doing well and staying safe.

My reading comprehension skills have significantly worsened after following the strategies outlined by both 7Sage and Powerscore. I find myself to be struggling the most with Main Point/Most Strongly Supported Questions on Reading Comprehension. If you have any suggestions for resources or strategy recommendations, please let me know. I am really struggling, so any and all help is greatly appreciated.

I don't understand how B is correct. It states that "a piece of narrow floorboard was NOT SIGNIFICANTLY LESS EXPENSIVE than a piece of wide floorboard'." However, how does that translate to narrow boards being more expensive--which I believe would make narrow boards a status symbol. Going by the phrasing- they could be only a little less expensive, or simply the same price. Please help and earn my eternal lsat blessings :)

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-24-section-3-question-23/

Hi all the purpose of this post is twofold: to teach everything I know about phenomenon hypothesis (PH) and correlation causation (CC) argument types, as well as to be a knowledge check where other people can correct me and make sure my understanding is solid. I'll start with PH, then go through CC, and then I'll show how both argument types are very similar.

In PH arguments, we have something that happens in the real world, then we offer an explanation of why that thing is the way it is. For instance, I see a bunch of seals barking. Then I see fishermen riding their boats in the harbor. I say, "It must be that seals bark whenever they see fishermen." My phenomenon is "seals bark" and my hypothesis is "they bark when they see fishermen." In lawgic, the SC would be "See fishermen" -> and the NC would be "Bark."

There are a lot of ways to strengthen PH and CC arguments and I'll explain them here: 1. A->B, 2. block B->A, 3. block C->A&B, 4. block "no relation," 5. block bad chronology, and 6. show "good consequences." 7. No cause no effect

A->B really just means "If see fishermen -> bark." This works with PH and CC arguments. How can I show that seals really do bark when they see fishermen? Show more data. a trend of more data. I don't want to see 1 more case of seals barking when they see fishermen, I want to see a lengthy trend of seals barking many times over a long period of time. I have seen at least 2-3 times where the LSAC will use a trap answer where the "strengthening" answer choice just throws in 1 more example of the hypothesis working. "You say seals bark when they see fishermen, well Joe saw a seal barking when fishermen were present." I want to see "over the last 5 years, there's an 85% chance that seals will bark whenever they see fishermen." I don't want a single corroborating example (although this does strengthen the hypothesis very, very, very slightly), I want to see a trend.

Block B->A. Let's say my argument is "When the sun shines, then my trees grow." To show that B actually causes A is a little weird in this case, but it would go like this: "My trees growing actually cause the sun to shine." If the latter case were true, then my argument that "sun shine -> trees grow" would be ruined! The causality would be flipped the other way around. The B->A style works really well for CC arguments where I'm trying to show that A is causing B; to show B->A, or block B->A can weaken / strengthen the argument.

For example - "When the sun shines, -> trees grow." To strengthen this argument I can block B->A. "It's also not the case that trees growing causes the sun to shine." I'm eliminating the possibility that my causality isn't flipped. To go back to seals, I would block the case that barking (NC) actually is the explanation for the seals to somehow be seeing fishermen (SC). "It's not the case that barking allows the seals to see fishermen."

Block C->A&B = block an alternate explanation.

What if it's the case that shrimp actually cause the seals to bark and the fishermen to appear? In that case my phenomenon hypothesis argument would be ruined. It's not the case that seeing fishermen causes seals to bark. It's something else.

I want to block this alternate explanation: "It's not the case that shrimp cause fishermen to appear and that shrimp cause seals to bark."

In a correlation causation argument, let's say "hearing about earthquakes in the news causes people to dream about earthquakes." But what if everyone was watching a movie about earthquakes, and this movie caused the dreams? We would want to strengthen our argument by blocking an answer choice that says "A recently released movie about earthquakes is known to cause people to dream about earthquakes." We can eliminate the possibility of an alternate explanation, and this strengthens our argument that actually hearing about earthquakes in the news caused dreams.

No relation / 5. bad chronology

Bad chronology goes hand in hand with "No relation" so I'll group them here. "If I study -> get 180." What if I see an independent study that says "studying has been shown to have no effect on your test results."? That would show "no relation."

Likewise, what if I said "Bob studied then he got a 180. Therefore, studying gives you a 180." Then I say "Bob started studying AFTER he got a 180." This shows bad chronology - the effect actually occurred before the alleged cause! Block this to strengthen.

Good consequences

If the phenomenon hypothesis argument is true, I want to show good consequences. If my hypothesis is true, what would happen? Let's say my hypothesis is "If seals see fishermen -> then they bark." Good consequences AC would say "Fishermen have increased in the bay 500% in the last month. Since then, sales of earplugs have increased 1000%." Fishermen are in the bay a lot more, which means seals are barking, and people don't want to listen to that so they buy earplugs.

Another example is "The city is increasing the speed limit by 30mph. Therefore there will be more car wrecks." A good consequences answer choice would say "There have been more speeding tickets since the speed limit increased."

If we take our hypothesis to be true, then make a reasonable assumption of what could happen if the hypothesis were true, we get a "good consequences" answer choice that strengthens the argument.

No cause no effect

Let's take the argument "It's sunny. Therefore my ice cream will melt." If S -> M.

If I show that there's no sun, and indeed my ice cream is not melting, this is good! I strengthen my argument.

However, if I show "Cause with no effect," or "Effect with no cause," these WEAKEN the argument. It's sunny, but my ice cream isn't melting. Or "my ice cream is melting, but it's not sunny!" These weaken.

#help Please

When the ‘OR’ is in the necessary and the arrow does not split, how is that diagramed? without the ‘OR’ if you have to chain them up?

When the ‘AND’ is in the sufficient and the arrow does not split, how is that diagrammed? without the ‘AND’ if you have to chain it up?

Congenial guests and plentiful supply (food and drinks) will ensure a successful dinner party. Sylvia has prepared more than enough to eat and drink and her guests are congenial therefore her party is certain to be a success.

I translated this to G & S -> SDP

Sylvia' S & G --> SDP

How is this a flawed reasoning (question stem)?

The only thing I can think of is I either mistranslated the first, when it should be SDP -> G & S

or I am equating more than enough food and drink with GOOD things to eat and drink.

How do you guys translate double negatives??

e.g. dogs cannot fly if they do not have wings.

I translated this as /F ---> /W

or am I supposed to apply the negation to the second part of the sentence and make it: F --> W??

I am having tough time translating sentences with that have negation on both ends.

#help

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-19-section-2-question-22/

I have studied LSAT for a while, but I have a timing issue. I recently completed PT 64 and made -12 but -1 in the blind review. Getting -1 in the blind review gives me some confidence that I'm smart enough to get good score on the test, but as long as I cannot complete it within the time limit, there is no way I can get 165+ on LSAT. I think my reading speed is slow and is not very accurate in reading comprehension under the time constraint. Thus, I want to ask anyone how to improve a speed issue and accuracy. Any help will be a great benefit to me!!!

I've been in a weird position where, after getting -2s regularly on LR, I've suddenly fallen down to -5 and even a -8. This became a trend RIGHT before the August LSAT, and even after taking it, hasn't changed at all. I'm feeling pretty discouraged, and was wondering if anyone might have any tips to fix this.

I don't understand how B is wrong; I understand how D is the correct answer and I went back and forth, but ultimately thought that the argument had no basis if they couldn't use recycled materials in the first place?? I get why D is the best choice, but I can't articulate or figure out why B is wrong #help

Hi all. I just did my LSAT writing for the August test.

With about 18 minutes left, while I was at the end of my second paragraph, the program started lagging significantly and froze. It was stuck like that for a few minutes, and then I saw that my second paragraph had been deleted. I rewrote it and finished the rest of my essay in a rush but did not have time to go back and proofread. Literally as I wrote my final word (typing was still slow for me because of lags), the clock hit 0. After the test I went back and read my essay and there were some typos. Not terrible, but I know that if my work hadn't been deleted, I would've had at least 5 minutes at the end to proofread. Is this worth complaining about and rewriting for? Has anyone had success with redoing their LSAT writing? Thanks!

I'm struggling to understand why A is the correct answer on this question. Anyone understand or want to take a stab at it?

Since there are two indicator words- cannot and unless, how should I go about logically mapping this out? They both imply opposite things. Cannot indicates some kind of necessary condition while unless indicates the sufficient. I mapped it out as /6-->B but the answer is actually B-->6 or /6-->/B. I guess Im confused because JY had us do specific processes for each of these indicating words.

I have been focusing a lot of my studying on LR and LG and have neglected RC for quite a while. I am looking to complete at least one RC passage a day. However, I do want to make sure that I am being strategic about my game plan. In order to get there, I have a few questions that I am hoping to get some input on.

I greatly appreciate any input.

In a rule like "Either J or K are selected, but not both are selected" in an In Out Game, why is it represented as J(-)not K and not J double not arrow K?? Wouldnt J double not arrow K mean that both are not selected?

This question proved to be incredibly challenging for me. Could someone please define how the argument used two different uses of the term "selfish?" Thanks in advance!

For some reason, I'm having a lot of trouble with Main Point questions for RC. I read about a strategy that involved trying to identify how many paragraphs the AC for a Main Point question encompasses to help narrow down between several options.

However, I've just run into an issue with PT 74 RC Passage 2 Question 9, where the correct AC completely skipped a paragraph in which the author laid out several reservations regarding the effectiveness of a technique he discussed in the rest of the passage. I had eliminated that AC on my first passed using the passage structure technique, so I'm skeptical that it's a good approach.

I'm curious about I) how much a correct AC can overlook for main point questions? 2) any suggestions or techniques you might have for choosing between two answer choices for RC when stuck.

Thanks!

So without going into too much detail, there was an AC yesterday on my LSAT that said something along the lines of "Politician A's campaign called all supporters prior to the debate and urged them to call the radio station regardless of who won the debate" Do we have to assume that supporters will call the radio station? I ended up choosing another one because i felt like that was too big of an assumption because i think most people wouldn't listen and follow through. Or maybe I am making a bigger assumption?

My Laptop screen is cracked and while it is not terrible, I got an external monitor a few months ago and have gotten used to just closing my laptop and using the monitor and external keyboard as if it was a desktop.

I heard for Flex exam they check if you have a secondary monitor before the exam (and assume they do not allow them). Does anyone know if I will not be allowed to use this even if I have a mirroring setup (both my laptop screen and monitor are the same, not extended).

Thanks!

#help

Can someone help explain this question to me? It's the first LR question I haven't been able to understand, even after blind review and review. I chose answer choice B.

all in the title. When are the scores going to be released for this august LSAT administration.

This was my second LSAT experience. I was supposed to take it yesterday, but I had a nightmare experience with internet connection and an unhelpful proctor so I took it this morning.

I deal with severe, diagnosed anxiety, thus I use accommodations. Yesterday I felt so calm and ready, and things going wrong really shook me. I practiced a lot of yoga, breathing, mindfulness, and self care to get just reset and try today.

My test order was LR-RC-LG

I am not sure what went wrong but halfway through the 1st LR section I had a panic attack. I managed to answer as much as I could, but had about 10-11 LR questions flagged. I usually miss 3-7 there in practice. I cried a little bit during the break, then I did my yoga, breathing, mindfulness again to regroup myself. I felt better after taking my time sitting down and doing the reading section. I saw a lot of people say it was very hard. It wasn't terrible as I expected, but one prompt was difficult for me (which is fine RC is usually my weakest). I had about 8 questions flagged there that I just was not sure about... (of course I may get other things wrong since Idk why RC is my toughest).

I took my other break and my LG felt pretty awesome. I feel confident about every answer I gave. I know sometimes people can get answers wrong due to over confidence, but it did feel easier than normal.

I think i easily missed 20-25 questions during this test. Unfortunately, score preview isnt an option for me, since I took my test the first time in May. I'm not sure if I should cancel?? My first score was a 151. I was trying to get a higher score (higher 150's - best case 160's). The calculators make it seem worst case it would be the same score? Idk what to do..

I am URM with a disability and low income. I felt a lot of pressure to get a higher score for scholarships, but never been the best standard test taker. I worked super hard for a year now and my practice tests improved from a 128 to my best PT 161. My average test scores from the past 9 practice tests have averaged about 155. All of my counselors say that my resume is very extraordinary and will help me stand out. My Undergrad GPA was a 3.58 from a top 20 school.

Sorry this is long I just wanted to give context. I am afraid to cancel it because what if it is slightly higher score than 151. I am also afraid if I don't cancel it, will a score lower than 151 hurt how I'm perceived by the schools?

#HELP

The key point is you can immediately rescheduled the exam time by chatting with live representative of ProctorU, do not try to email or call to LSAC, which is a recommendation if you want to reschedule immediately within this round, and also when the final exam time is not yet expired.

While my tragedy is,

I'm taking LSAT-Flex first time, I scheduled my August LSAT-Flex at 10:20AM PDT of Sep.2 which is today, though I'm personally at CA, my residential community is couple of miles away from the wildfire, that's the reason why when viewed the information about reschedule due to wildfire, I never thought I need to, and then is the nightmare beginning. I logged into the ProctorU around one hour earlier, and everything seems great, the timing clock counting well, when the time arrived at about 10:00AM PDT, I noticed the timing clock showed over 50 mins left, I'm curious whether they may change the scheduled time due to some reason? After ten mins later, I finally realized there is no internet because my other opened website showed so, even though ProctorU timing clock still counting. I started to repeatedly retart the internet and check out with Xfinity who said there is routine maintenance from 9:41AM to expected available until 3:30PM today, fine, no notice in advance as usual. When I fortunately connect computer via my hotpot from cellphone, the start icon disappeared.

At this moment, I'm kind of depression and almost cannot control my emotion, but my conscious told me it's not the right time, so I tried email LSAC firstly and keep calling them as well as tried to click the reschedule icon to find out available time, finally I tried to transfer to chat with ProctorU live representative through their chat window, and that's the right path. Christian is the live representative helped me to rescheduled another time for me at 3:40PM PDT immediately, and also told me if the Xfinity do not work as expected, the hotpot maybe fine as well. When story arriving at this section, there is only around 1 hour left for the new scheduled exam, I began to buy a couple of different extra data package for my cellphone from T-mobile (if someone knows which service provided by T-mobile is great for hotpot, please tell me, thank you so much), but no one good enough for the needed internet speed, still hoping Xfinity will back in time. BTW, I also called the nearby public library while they already closed at 2PM, and no one answer from the leasing office, then stay at home is the choice.

However, Xfinity did not keep it's promise whose notice changed to "back as soon as possible" when I check again at 3:30PM, and my hotpot was unable to support system running, missed the start again. When I chat with live representative again for this situation, due to I cannot promise when I can have stable internet before 4:00PM PDT today, though he can connect me with proctor directly, but the risk is the disconnection maybe at anytime after the exam start, my better choice is to request an extension from LSAC. This time I face the life. Ironically, Xfinity back at around 4:40PM, good for them.

Hoping this sharing is helpful for anyone needed, and good luck for you all. Still waiting response from LSAC either email or phone, thank you for your time.