Im having trouble knowing when to include words like "H/T" in a space. What clues should I be paying attention in including a word/word?

I am wondering if I should take the LSAT again... I have studied for about a year now. My average score has been 154, but the week before the test I scored a 161. I was very excited and positive that I would do decent on the LSAT-Flex.. but I ended up with a 151.

On the day of the test, my test was delayed 30 minutes and I had to sit there and wait in silence until I was matched with someone who could conduct the test with my accommodation. It really messed with my nerves the first section, but I used all the skills I could to calm down.

I was really hoping to only sit for this one time. I feel pretty burnt out, but I was shooting for some schools around T-14 to T-30 schools and only one T-2 reach school... Is there any advice that people have? Is it worth putting in more time to try again? I've heard mixed things about people's score not changing much. At this point I just want to start working on my other application needs...

I'm a slow reader by nature, and years of school have pretty much taught me to skim everything I read for the main points to combat that. But studying for the LSAT, and especially LR, I've learned it's so important to read every single word to get the full meaning. When I have all the time in the world and when paragraphs aren't that complex it's usually not a problem.

The problem comes under timed pressure. I usually end up panicking and skimming to get main ideas. I end up missing questions that I easily could have gotten without that pressure.

While reviewing, I often find words I missed like "some" "many" "significantly" or "likely" that were the key to getting the question right. In Blind Review I really only miss 1-4 in LR and timed I miss more like 6 -10. The disparity is even greater in RC where I usually end up guessing on an entire passage for lack of time.

Did anyone else have similar struggles while learning to read for the LSAT? Are there any types of drills that helped? Or is it more of a long-term mindset change? Or any advice to overcome the mental aspect of the LSAT and avoid panicking would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you guys!!

Starting to foolproof logic games, and I'm wondering what other people's personal practices are for the process (i.e. how many games do you do per day, do you wait until you've mastered a game before you start a new one, or do you rotate between a few while mastering them, etc.) I can't help but feel like I'm neglecting other sections of the test by devoting so much time to only LG, so I'm also wondering if y'all do different section types during a study day. Any details you can provide or tips about the process would be super helpful!

On BR, I always get SA and NA right because I can take the time to diagram them correctly and really think about it. But when I'm timed there's just no way I can coherently figure out the diagram in enough time that I should. Anyone else having this problem and have any tips?

Thanks!

I have a quick question on the application of the "or" rule in the Games. For an example, lets say that in a 8 slash sequencing line, if a rule states that L comes right before S or R comes right before H go together, this is an inclusive or right. If L comes right before S, it is still possible that R also can come right before H right?

Is there a method for identifying the ASQ in each Logic Game question set?

Is the reasoning flaw in the stimulus that it concludes what makes something not censorship from the sufficient condition for censorship?

If A or B, then Censorship exists.

From this, we cannot conclude that censorship does not exist.

Similarly, in (D),

If A, then heroic.

From this, we cannot conclude what's not heroic. A is a sufficient condition for being heroic, not its necessary condition. If it were the necessary condition, we have a way of concluing that something is NOT heroic. Is this all there is to see in this question?

Hi,

I know for some people this question may have been easy, but I was really stumped between B and E because of the last sentence in the stimulus. I saw the last sentence as saying that the trait that determined why the trees had different lifespans was attributed to the trees rather than the species. As a result, I chose B.

I am kind of starting to see why E is right instead of B, but I am still kinda stuck on what exactly I did wrong in interpreting the stimulus. Can anyone explain to me their reasoning about what the last sentence actually meant and why E is right?

thanks!

Best regards

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-70-section-1-question-12/

So I am just now starting logic games and I am somewhat confused on when I should be doing the full proof method. Is that something that should wait until I start to PT, or should I full proof the problem sets from the CC as well? I am completely new to the games, and as expected I struggled on the first sequencing games. I am still having some trouble understanding if I need to go back and do the game over again or not like the full proof method says to do. If so, am I supposed to full proof every single problem set game that I struggle with initially?

Hey everyone, quick shortcut for these kinds of LG questions. First, look at each of the answer choices and see if any of them must be true. The ones that aren't are instantly wrong. Think about it--you're testing for logical equivalence. For two statements to be logically equivalent, they must be true in all circumstances. If either one of the statements isn't true all of the time, they can't constitute a logically valid premise, and they can't be used to imply the validity of other statements.

Hope this helps!

Hello all,

I feel like my LR is getting worse, and I'm thinking about whether I should look for an online tutor.

My goal is to get my LR down to -1/-2 consistently, but in reality I average around -5.

My LR performance during a full 5-section-PT is also worse than when I do them as a timed drill.

I am really curious to hear from those who have worked/been working with a tutor for LR.

What was your experience like? Did you see any benefits/results?

Do you recommend any tutor specifically? Do you have suggestions on who I should maybe avoid (you can pm me!!)?

And any general LR tips are also very much appreciated!

I'm having difficulty understanding why the correct answer choice for this problem is A. I'm struggling to derive from the stimulus that the government should continue trying to determine acceptable toxin levels. Any help would be appricated!

I am working on making an interactive flow chart, but I thought I would share what I have typed up so far. Please feel free to correct/add on, or give any suggestions on memorizing other than flashcards. I have a pretty ambitious idea for a flowchart/app, but it's hard to work on that and also study for LSAT so probably won't happen anytime soon.

**Weaken**

weaken

most vulnerable to the conclusion

most vulnerable

counts as evidence against

calls into question

**Strengthen**

strengthen

most helps to justify

Support

**Sufficient Assumption**

true if assumed

enable conclusion to be properly drawn

justify the conclusion

the conclusion follows logically if (This is also a keyword for MBT so watch out)

**Debate**

counter

in response to

**Paradox/Conflict**

most helps to explain

resolve

explain

account for

discrepancy

surprising result

**Conclusion**

main point

main conclusion

**Must Be True**

must be true

follows logically (also a keyword for SA so watch out)

inference

properly inferred

properly concluded

properly drawn

**MSS**

most strongly supported

most strongly suggests

**NA**

necessary

depends

required

relies

assume/assumption

the conclusion does not follow unless

the argument assumes which one

**Method **

argument proceeds by

describes

argumentative technique

method of reasoning

strategy of argumentation

**AP**

role in argument

function in argument

argument part

the reference to

the statement that

**Flaw**

flaw

most vulnerable to criticism

questionable technique employed

Is doing the bundle 1-35 still a good idea in order to master games? Because people are saying now the games are different from the older games. Once I finish the CC on games how should I full proof? Should I do 1-35? Or for example 15-49?

Hello,

For a while, I have been practicing Logical Reasoning and I cannot seem to cancel out irrelevant answers immediately. I seem to get bogged down by them especially for strengthen, weaken,and sometimes necessary assumptions, and RRE. I have to really think hard about the 4 answer choices before choosing the right one. However, even then, I can still get them wrong. I understand that you cannot get every question right. But I would appreciate you guys for a general principle to eliminating irrelevant answers quickly so that at least I can boil down to 2 answers?

Your help will be much appreciated. Thank you.

Anyone here that is into modern board games have any that would help with LGs? TY!

na

Is it better to nail one section of LG before moving onto the next? Or continue to move forward and come back and review?

Hi,

I took the May one on May 19th. I am scheduled to take the June LSAT Flex.

On my ProcturU site, my account shows that I am scheduled to take June LSAT Flex but also had taken a June LSAT Flex on May 19th. I had to restart my computer after 1.5 hours of chatting with several technicians/representatives.

LSAC only says that it's out of their hands and that I should take it up with Proctor U.

But, ProctorU hasn't replied to my email over a week and their chat/call lines are all not available after many many waits.

Has anyone else had this experience? If yes, were you able to resolve it?

Can anybody help me with this question, because it is driving me crazy.

Why is B wrong? The stimulus clearly states "anygiven individual molecule of substance can activate..." how is this statement not supporting B?

And how can C be right? how can we be sure that no sweeter substance will be found? What about half a molecule for instance?Are we supposed to assume that it is impossible to activate a receptor with less than a whole molecule?

This question is truly infuriating, any help would be greatly appreaciated!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-21-section-3-question-16/

Hi,

So this question is really hard in my opinion-- I have been looking at this problem for quite a while and I still can't see why A is correct. Can anyone explain why A was correct here?

Thanks!

Best regards

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-39-section-3-passage-3-questions/

How does everyone approach the comparative passage in reading comprehension?

I've seen a couple of posts that advocate for reading passage A, going through the questions then reading passage B and again going through the questions (https://classic.7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/1234 https://classic.7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/8533). The presumptive benefit is not falling into probably what is the most common trap answer choice - a detail that is discussed in one passage but not the other.

Admittedly I have not tried this approach (and I do plan on experimenting later with this) but for point-at-issue questions in LR, I have never liked the approach of reading one response, eliminating answer choices and then reading the second response before hopefully honing in on the correct answer. For whatever reason, I just find it too mechanical and feel that I am better able to get a sense of the tension in the two statements by reading them concurrently instead of 'jumping around' the screen from stimulus to ACs, to a different part of the stimulus back to the ACs again. Perhaps somewhat related is that I find that doing the acceptable situation question in LG as I read the rules to be somewhat discombobulating and that it disrupts the natural rhythm of figuring out how the rules interact with one another (I'd happily trade away the additional 10 seconds in efficiency for a stronger comprehension of the game board).

Additionally, I think the digital format compounds the amount of needlessly bouncing around in the comparative passage in terms of having to click through each question.

My current approach is to read Passage A in totality, then creating a low resolution summary for the structure of this passage. Afterwards, I go onto Passage B, again reading the passage in its entirety and before building out another quick low resolution summary for this second passage and finally I quickly consider how the two passages are related.

Previously, I read Passage A (creating a low res summary for each paragraph as I went) and would immediately proceed to Passage B (also creating a low res summary for each paragraph as I went) and felt that this handicapped me in getting a sense of how the two passages as a whole related to each other. Also, I think going right from one to the other further confused me to what details were included in each passage.

Does anyone else do something similar? I know that RC tends to be the most divergent in terms of strategy but just curious as to what others are doing here.

Hi everyone! Does anyone have tips on the "word in context" questions for RC? I keep consistently struggling with these questions despite the seemingly straight forward manner of the qs. Any tips would be appreciated!

Hi 7Sage!

I was wondering if any of you blind review logic games? Fool proofing has dramatically helped my understanding and my competence on logic games and I am continuing to do the fool-proofing method. But I don't know if blind reviewing my logic games after I first take a game is really necessary.. it seems that logic games is just fundamentally different in regards to study strategy than blind reviewing logical reasoning and reading comp. Blind review for both of LR and RC have helped a lot of course.

Just thought I would ask for some opinions.

Thanks!