I’m led to this question because of these steps (below) that I took lol. Correct me at any point if there is a flaw in how I went about it!

In 72-2-25, /A and /B strengthens A cause B. We want to strengthen the argument’s assumption by showing that A causes B (buy online cause /use car), so we say /A and /B (/buy online and use car). This makes sense to me intuitively because the CAC is saying that /cause correlated with /effect, which strengthens the relationship between cause and effect.

OK SO, IF /A ← correlated→ /B strengthens A -cause-> B (what we have above - no cause and no effect strengthens cause → effect ), does that mean:

A -cause-> B, which implies A ← correlated→ B, implies /A ← correlated → /B?

And if the answer is yes or no, is there a cleaner theoretical reason why?

*footnote: I shortened direct mail advertising (buy phone or online) from 72-2-25 to just “buy online” to focus purely on the theory part. From 72-2-25: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-72-section-2-question-25/, but this idea has also come up for me as a question in other causation q's.

Has anyone gotten their disclosed report from the June Flex yet? Mine still says that it's not available for me to view

I just finished fool proofing games from 1-35 and I was consistently doing most of them all right within time once I got a hang of it. I took two full timed sections today and scored -4 and -5. I did my blind review (before seeing my results) under timed constraints and managed to get a -0 and -1. Is this a transitioning issue that will go away once I do full sections more frequently or do I have to approach sections differently?

I was wondering if JY has any 'live-commentary' type of video where he completes a RC passage on the Digital Exam. I am taking the July Flex and struggle a lot with RC because I can't write notes on the passage.

I am a little confused about the weak answer and strong answer choice in necessary assumption question. So it said in the CC that we should always look for weak answer choice, and most strong answer choices are wrong when it comes to NA question.

But sometimes I also see strong answer choice as the correct answer. For example, PT 24 Section 2, Q17. The AC B : "no nation that was not among the major powers at the end of the second world war would become a major power"

Is this a strong language AC? So in a situation we should focus on weak/strong language AC?

Thank you!

I am wondering if people are taking the time to fool proof the problem sets (10x+) and game board setup example questions? I feel like I should be fool proofing wherever possible, but I also recognize the time commitment. Any thoughts?

Just wanted to post as possible inspiration and as a thank you to JY and the entire 7sage community! When I first started studying I remember seeing people post things online that claimed to not anticipate an increase of over 10 points from your initial diagnostic; know that is completely untrue. If it wasn't for my intense, I mean, INTENSE lack of desire to take a gap year I would probably skip this cycle and keep at it for the 170. The test is absolutely learnable as long as you put in the work and you have patience with your brain as it learns how to process information in the way the test writers are looking for. I will be re-testing in an attempt to solidify my score in the 90th percentile (that insane RC and 4 hours of sleep really did me in on test day LOL). But I just wanted to say congratulations to all who completed this test during such a crazy year. If you feel yourself wanting to reach out don't hesitate to message me!

I know this is a great score, but my average for PTs was 176 so I was hoping for one a bit higher on test day. I know I messed up the LG on the June test which is usually a perfect section for me.

I want to retake, the only thing holding me back is the idea that some of the top schools like Harvard will be irritated if you retake a score that's already at their median. I've been studying so hard for this to make up for a lack of prestige for my undergraduate college and decent, but not amazing, softs.

My gut tells me I want to retake it because I think I can do better. I've also heard that getting a higher score could get you more scholarship money to lower T14s.

What do you all think? Should I retake it?

Cold diagnostic in April 2019 was 142, after over a year of studying solely with 7Sage (on and off due to working full time) I snagged a 169 with the June FLEX. Kudos to 7Sage for making such an affordable, effective studying platform.

Any suggestions on how to improve my in/out and double layered sequencing?

LG is keeping my score under 160.

Thnx.

why is the answer e and not c? can someone break down the logic for me?

Scored 163 after completing the LSAT Trainer by Mike Kim, with 7Sage LG videos that were freely available back in February. I realized then I needed a better resource that could help me practice more methodically, and that's when I subscribed to 7Sage. 4 months have past since, and I got my 173 today! Thanks 7Sage

Couldn't believe my eyes today --- I scored multiple points above my recent practice test average!! I am so grateful for JY and the 7sage discussion/advice forums. Without this company, I don't think I would've stayed hopeful and dedicated through every studying plateau. Thank you a million.

Can’t believe it really happened, I had given up on the LSAT twice in the last 5 years and my last real score was a 167. Absolutely could not have pulled this off without those LG videos. Thanks J.Y.!

I started studying for the LSAT at the beginning of quarantine because corona switched up my plans and I decided to go to law school this fall. I started off with a diagnostic of 146 and felt very discouraged. However, after consistent studying I was able to score a 158 on the June Flex and have a good chance at getting into my dream school. Thank you so much 7Sage!! But I do not recommend only two months of consistent studying it was really stressful haha

Thank you 7Sage community! Could not have done this without everyone. I am so incredibly excited and relieved right now.

Everyone out there getting ready for July and August, keep at it, you got this!

can't believe it, i felt like the flex went horribly and i considered cancelling every day.

thank you 7sage (3 good luck to everyone in july/aug, you guys are going to kill it!!(/p)

Hello All,

I have received my score, 149. This was my third time taking it. The first and second time I have no previous studying. For the third take I took the course and took about 6/7 months to study. I was scoring 164/165 on the newest PT's. However, on test day everything crashed and burned and received a score 20 points below my PT average. I freaked out on LG, which ironically was my strong suit and bombed that section. I was wondering if it would be wise to re take the LSAT in August and figure out what went wrong (I had test anxiety) and try to bring up my score on actual test day. If so, this would be my fourth time taking it. I am wanting to apply to Fall 21 or maybe Spring 21 depending where I would be able to go. Going to law school is my dream but I am not a good test taker. 7Sage is such a big and understanding community and I really would appreciate it, if y'all could give me some insight.

Thank you

I wanted to share a resource which has helped me and a few others gain a better understanding of logical reasoning. The Wireless Philosophy Youtube channel has a 35 video playlist on what they call Critical Thinking. These videos address what arguments are, fundamental principles of reasoning, and common fallacies. I especially like the fallacy videos because they are a bit outside of the normal "cookie cutter" flaws that we think of but nonetheless are heavily used on LR questions. Many of these fallacies slap a label or term on reasoning patterns that we all know "feel" wrong but can't always articulate.

I did not watch these videos in order. I watched a couple a day to supplement and break up my studies. I think there is much value in thinking about arguments and the LSAT from many perspectives. Hopefully these videos help something click for someone out there!

Here is the Link: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLtKNX4SfKpzX_bhh4LOEWEGy3pkLmFDmk

So I was setting up the rules for Game/Preptest 44, sec 3 game 3.

Game stem: A tour group plans to visit exactly five archaeological sites. Each site was discovered by exactly one of the following archaeologist - F,G,O and each dates from The 8th,9th, Or 10th century. The tour must satisfy the following conditions:

There was this rule that stated: Exactly one of the sites was discovered by Gallagher, and it dates from the tenth century.

2)How do I know G and 10 are not a Block, I’m sure many people create it as a false block. What modifier in the statement let’s me know it’s conditional ?!?

3)when it does state “exactly”- is it implying that G is in the game ONLY once Since the game stem isn’t requiring all variables to be present, but that ALL sites be occupied by once the archeologist and when G is Summoned it’s carrying the century Variable with it ?

Scored in the 98th percentile on June Flex thanks to JY and 7sage!

HI everyone! First post on here. I found out this morning that I scored significantly lower on my June LSAT-Flex than my PT average. Just signed up for 7Sage Ultimate+ to keep practicing, but I am feeling SO discouraged. What I thought would be my safety schools are now barely target schools. I am scheduled to retake in August - I know this is a quick turn around, but I want the option to apply early. Does anyone have advice for improving my score and/or getting my confidence back up?

Just took my first LSAT in June and received a 170. I had been consistently scoring 172s on practice tests and sometimes hitting 174. Timing was never an issue for me and I usually scored -0 on LG. Any advice for retaking it in August? Do you recommend redoing the curriculum or just sticking to taking practice tests?

Hi everyone, I really want to improve my LR score, so I am currently working through the Loophole book. I'm trying to learn how to do CLIR-ing properly, but I'm not sure if the loopholes I am finding for argument stimulus-types are correct. Does anyone have any tips for dealing with this/or any insight on how this strategy helped them improve in LR? Thank you so much in advance!!

Hello, I have been struggling with necessary assumptions for a surprisingly unnecessary amount of time and still I cannot totally understand the concept as I have received seemingly conflicting methods to solve this question stem. Let me start with a simple question: if You negate a statement, and that statement makes the conclusion MUST BE FALSE, then that statement before its negated is the necessary assumption? If a statement is negated and the conclusion is COULD BE FALSE, then the statement before it was negated has no bearing on the argument and is not a necessary assumption? I really need help strengthening my firm understanding of this concept because it has been hit or miss for me. I sometimes would get most of them right in a PT and get most of them wrong in another PT, 50-50 right in another PT. Please help