I am having trouble with the lawgic. My take away was:

WD m→ feature art

/comfortable→/WD

comfortable→SI

My thoughts for chaining...

contrapose comfortable→SI to become /SI→/comfortable

Therefore the chain...

/SI→/comfortable→/WD

So if /WD then... /WD m→/feature art

Can someone please explain why this is incorrect?

I appreciate the help!

Admin Note: Edited title. For LR questions, please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

Looking for anyone that may have an old copy or extra copy of the Loophole that they are willing to sell. Will pay for shipping costs etc! Would really like to get my hands on this if possible so let me know!

Thanks in advance

I work full time and I am looking for someone who can help me grasp LR and RC. I didn't do too great on the August LSAT so I am trying to change my study approach.

Hi everyone, I just found out that LSAC has plans to gradually remove the logic games section from the LSAT supposedly through 2023. Was just wondering if anyone knows whether this next testing cycle is going to contain the logic games section...

Hi I am looking to start a group chat with people who are interested in having study buddies/accountability partners for the November LSAT. The discord link is right here: Hi sorry I have been bad at responding I made a group me link feel free to join. Right now there aren't any members in it but it will fill up super soon as I have a lot of ppl interested! The group me link is right here: https://groupme.com/join_group/103075166/sH9h2wYR

As the title said i am only breaking into the 170s when i take the 130s? i am in the 165-168 range in other tests, does anyone have any idea why this could be ?

I feel like I have been struggling a little bit with these questions, especially with the new core curriculum compared to the old one. Does anyone have any advice on how to approach these questions, especially when it comes to causal logic?

Hi! Taking the August LSAT, there were a couple questions that IMO ended up effectively being small logic games. I won't go into specifics, but I was wondering on strategy for these types of questions-- I wasted lots of time on one question and still couldn't figure it out. I would love to DM if anyone feels similarly!

Hi,

I am currently at a plateau of 152 and I noticed that in timed conditions I struggle quite a bit with pre-phrasing, especially with inference-based questions, NA, WSE and RRE. I find that with WSE and RRE specifically, it is very difficult to pre-phrase because there is such a wide range of responses, and somehow I get quite a bit of NA questions wrong in timed conditions. Sometimes also, I just look at a question and struggle to see the "loophole" or the inference. I tend not to diagram because it slows me down too much and confuses me more in MBT/MSS questions. Sometimes I even "pre-phrase" an inference and then find it in the answer choices and it was wrong.

Also, I noticed that I perform consistently and significantly better on timed sections than on full PTs. I make more mistakes in full PTs than in timed sections -- especially in the first 2 sections of the test. Any ideas on why this may be?

I am aiming for between 157-160 and would appreciate any advice on pre-phrasing strategies, getting better at coming up with the right inference and consistency in test performance.

Hi lovely people, I need some advice on how I can improve my score from high 150s to 160s for the October LSAT. My average score right now is 159.1. My best score is 163, but I haven't been doing well on my most recent PTs.

I'm struggling a lot with Flaw questions. The problem I have seems to be that although I managed to identify the flaw from reading the stimulus, once I moved on to the ACs, the wording confused me and I ended up picking the wrong AC.

Also, my RC score has been fluctuating from -3 to -9 and I don't even know what I'm doing right or wrong.

I have been doing BR and keeping a wrong answer journal from the beginning. I don't know what else to do. What should I be focusing on now? Keep doing more PT? Review Flaw questions and do more drills? Taking untimed RC drills?

Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

Hello,

I know that iA —most→ B → C, then you cannot conclude most A are C. But if it becomes:

A —most→ B → C→ D

can you conclude that most A are D?

Don't need an incredible score, just need a solid base in October in the high 150s. Any advice is helpful. I'm just struggling for the last few months in a study rut.

Howdy y'all! I just joined the 7Sage platform to study for the October test, which I didn't expect to be taking. Just took September (after Blueprint's 170+ live class) and I don't know if I actually broke 170, so here we go again.

I know that my biggest weakness is conditional/formal logic in LR... I have the basics down but kinda freak out when there's a 5-6 sentence stimulus that you're expected to diagram to find the missing link or what must be true.

Anyway... for the seasoned 7Sage studiers... what lessons/content do you recommend?? I don't want to go through the whole curriculum; I just want the full-fledged 7Sage take on complex diagramming LR questions. Tips/Recs? What materials should I read/watch/review?

In advance: THANK YOU!!!!

It seems like I am incapable at doing the strengthening and weakening questions. I read the answer choices and just think that none of them make sense. I could use some advice.

So, I'm sure a lot of you are in the same boat as me and are panicking for the September LSAT. I am reaching out to ask people who have already written the test or are also writing it next week, what they are doing to prepare themselves for test day. I know I should get a good sleep, exercise, and eat to keep my energy intact but besides that, what's the best practice for these last 7 days? Should I be doing full practice tests every day, drilling, doing sections, or just relaxing? I know that I will probably not get my desired score, however, I want to put my all into this and not let my last 4 months of studying go to waste. I am also seeking any tips for how to keep up your momentum, considering the test is fairly condensed in 2 hours and 45 minutes.

My other area of concern is my argumentative writing sample. In the next week, I don't have any free time to complete it and was wondering when is the latest that I can complete it and still get my score on September 25th like everyone else? Also, I was planning to go into it blind, but have been told otherwise. How many practice samples should I complete? I don't want to waste my time, but at the same time, I want to be able to write a well-crafted essay.

Finally, for those who have done remote testing, when do you recommend setting up the test software and is 30 minutes before the exam a sufficient amount of time to log in and get settled in with the proctor?

For anyone who has reached this far and takes the time out of their day to ease my anxiety by replying to my thread, thank you in advance and good luck to you all!

Hey guys, so I graduated undergrad about 2 years ago, and a majority of my classes ended up being online at the time due to Covid, although I have already emailed a few Professors I had in person asking if they would be willing to write me one, I have gotten denied. At this point I feel really stuck and Im not sure what to do. I could ask an old boss but I have only worked retail jobs during my gap year or didnt work at all. Any advice? Is it possible to apply without any letters? I know its a stretch but im freaking out.

So I’m getting ready to take the October LSAT and I’ve realized I’m not even close to ready. My entire time drilling, I’ve only ever done LR. I’m in a bad spot. I’ve barely touched on RC but I am hoping my stride for mastery of LR will help my skills on RC. I suppose this leads me to ask what is my best strategy to getting prepared for this test? How many questions should I be drilling per day? To add to the frustration, I’m not sure I’m getting much better at the question types that I most struggle with. I’ve only done a few practice tests since I feel like drilling would be more effective because it’s targeting my weaknesses. Any advice is appreciated.

If anyone can help explain this I would truly appreciate it!! I've been trying to understand it for the past hour but still can't grasp why the right answer is right. I've watched the explanation video on 7sage and read power score's explanation but don't understand their conditional diagrams.

Conclusion: Thus, without increased funding from sources other than profit-driven institutions, the chemistry department is unlikely to gain the prestige that only achievements in basic science research confer.

Evidence/Premise:

Diagram explained by Power-score:

Premise: Advances in basic research -> More money

Premise: Gain prestige -> Advances in basic research

Conclusion: Gain prestige -> Money from sources other than Big Pharma.

Assumption/Pre-phrase: More money -> Money from sources other than Big Pharma

This is my new Diagram while reworking the problem:

SABR = Significant advances in Basic Research/ Only achievements in basic research confer

SFBR = Secure Funding for Basic Research

GP = Gain the Prestige

IF (NP) = Increased Profit from Non profits and non Pharmaceutical companies

Premise 1: SABR -> SFBR

Premise 2: GP -> SABR

Conclusion: GP -> IF (NP)

So here is where I am lost. I originally only had Premise 1 and the Conclusion diagramed because I thought "that only achievements in basic science research confer" was a part of the Conclusion. But I am assuming because of the necessary indicator "only" we need to add another premise and thats where premise 2 comes in? But I'm confused where we connect the pre-phrase/missing link/assumption because there are 2 "GP's". If anyone can please help explain because I know understanding this will be helpful towards future questions with the same difficulty and concept. I tried understanding it without conditional diagrams as I would approach it like any other NA question, but that was difficult as well.

Hi guys!

I am a bit confused on how to use "without" when writing out conditionals. I understand that you negate the sufficient when you see the word without, but what if the statement says:

John always sleeps without socks.

Isn't "always" a necessary indicator?

Would it be diagrammed as:

sleep -> /socks (this one makes more sense to me)

or

/socks -> sleep

Another example, I know that if the statement says: You can't come home without making money, the conditional would be written out as:

come home -> made money.

Just a bit confused with the "always... without..." statement I mentioned initially.

Thanks!

I have been doing a couple of NA questions and I have noticed that the right answer choice sometimes sounds stupid but most of the time is linked to something said in the conclusion. Would this always be the case? Is the right answer for NA questions always linked to something that was mentioned in the conclusion?

I feel like i have been getting these confused. Could someone explain the approach to solving these? I know the NA has to be true but what does that even mean I think im overthinking these questions.

Does anyone know how the exact strategy for weakening questions? I've listened to every approach but continue to get the the most easiest Weakening questions wrong.

Looking to increase by score by at least 15 points in the November test. I just really need words of encouragement and ways you guys are able to stay commitment and focused. What are some techniques you guys use? If anyone is interested in creating a study group please let me know!

Update: I created a discord and I'm still in the middle of setting everything up. Both for those of you who want to join!

https://discord.gg/JCKBH4BkEp

LINK IS UPDATED AND SET TO NEVER EXPIRE

If you are having issues joining please DM me!

I need help understanding why the correct answer choice (A) is correct for this question. I understand that all the other answer choices are terrible (leaving A as the only answer choice), but I still feel like A is too strongly stated to be a necessary assumption for the argument.

In my thinking, a necessary assumption for the argument is that the econ explanation and psychological explanation are mutually exclusive from each other. Answer choice A seems to go way beyond this and say that the econ explanation is excludes all other explanations (not just the psychological one).

What's wrong with my thought process? Thanks!

I've been having issues with Link Assumption and Conditional Reasoning questions. Does anyone have any good resources (7sage live classes, syllabus, outside books, etc.) they suggest to improve on these questions types?