Game 4 - Can anyone please explain this game.

I had a very rough concept of its limitations. I somehow guessed 4/6 correctly but I did not fully understand any of it.

From a logic perspective (see below) I can't work out any meaningful differences, but I noticed that JY splits these off in his map of bi-conditional statements. Am I missing something?

A ↔ C

/A ↔ /C

I am 25% through the core curriculum and just finished the "Sufficient Assumption & Pseudo Sufficient Assumption Questions" section. After doing all the lessons and problem sets, I am still struggling to get SA and PSA correct. Something just isn't clicking. I watch all of the explanations but they feel very abstract to me. Is there another resource I can engage (LSAT Trainer, Power Score, Khan, etc.) that can help teach me these concepts in a different way? I think a new approach might be helpful, but the only study resource I've ever used is 7Sage (which for the record, I love). I'm desperate, because I know how foundational these questions are to doing well on LR. Any tips/advice?

Looking at a Monday forecast for rain % is pretty irrelevant at this point. This is a "RAIN event", and therefore the major concern is going to be flooding and pooling. The span of rain associated with Barry is1138 miles...Matagorda Bay Tx - Florida (even the Bahamas)! The major issue isn't just what falls as rain. When rivers, lakes, and water sheds start overflowing, things get even more tricky.

What would LSAC do if we (and proctors) are unable to make it to their testing site?

I cannot see us losing the advantages of July 15th LSAT due to a natural disaster...

What can/could we possibly be looking at?

I know some people argue that logical reasoning has gotten more challenging in recent practice tests, but I find that for the questions I am getting wrong on practice tests 1-10, I literally just do not understand what the stimulus or answer choices are saying at times. I find that the more recent practice tests are a lot more straightforward and use language in a way that I am more familiar with. Maybe this has to do with the fact that English is my second language and the early 90s LSATs are what my parent's generation would've taken, but they do not speak English with me at home so I may be unfamiliar with the way language has changed / is spoken differently. What are your thoughts on this?

Hi all,

There are 10 weeks until the September 2019 LSAT. I was super discouraged after getting bumped off the waitlist to my desired school the second time I'm writing it. Since I am overall free this summer, I thought I would take the opportunity to write once more for my fourth time. Is it best to use ULTIMATE or should I go for the basic starter package and take 1-2 PT's a week? Any input would be good!

Hello all,

I should make it clear that I am not looking to get a perfect score in the RC section but rather maximize efficiency. In LG, by skipping the substitution and equivalence questions and coming back if I had time I was able to boost my average a few points. In LR, I skip any PF questions after question #10 and come back if I have time. This has also boosted my average for LR. I was wondering if i can employ a similar strategy for RC. I find that the rated difficulty of the passage really has no bearing on my score for that passage. Some 2 star passages I bomb because I struggle to understand the content. Some 5 star passages I ace because I understand the content. My average score for an RC section is -10 and with that I am still scoring in the 160's. Also it is important to note my BR for RC sections is ALWAYS -1 or -2. I can provide more context if needed, any response is appreciated!

I am worried I may not have enough time to complete the curriculum without rushing. I am signed up for the September 21st LSAT date. Do I have enough time? Should I jump around from LR to LG to RC; or should I just complete the lessons in the order they are presented? My initial diagnostic was around 135 and I'm hoping to get into the 160's. I suppose I can always retake, but I want to apply to law school this fall for the year 2020. I've been making good progress with the LR lessons and am going to keep plugging away. I'm working 50 plus hours per week currently and studying about 3 hours per day in the evenings. With one rest day that means about 18 hours per week of study time. I'm also trying to pt twice per week.

I have an issue with AC A because I don't see how the argument's sub-conclusion draws from the stated claim. It seems to me that there is a need for an unstated assumption - something along the lines of "heavy industrial activity rids a region of its natural beauty". The part of the claim about dependence on natural beauty is a necessary condition for the operation of many local businesses. So, correct me if I'm wrong, but in order for the claim to be "direct" evidence for the argument's sub-conclusion, doesn't this sub-conclusion have to invoke the notion of how natural beauty would be tarnished in the presence of industrial activity? Without this notion, there could be many reasons why coal mining would force the majority of local businesses to close, one of which being (perhaps) the more lucrative or stable business opportunity of starting your own coal mine.

Also, it seems to me that the same unstated assumption mentioned above, needed (in my opinion) to classify the claim as "direct" evidence for the argument's sub-conclusion, can analogously be used to classify the claim as "direct" evidence for the argument's main conclusion: if coal mining harms natural beauty, then it seems reasonable to expect that coal mining would reduce the number of jobs since many local businesses depend on natural beauty.

Would appreciate any thoughts on this.

Admin note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-87-section-3-question-20/

Fines levied against those responsible for certain environmentally damaging accidents are now so high that it costs a company responsible for such an accident more to pay the fine than it would have cost to adopt measures that would have prevented the accident. Therefore, since businesses value their profits, those that might have such accidents will now install adequate environmental safeguards.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A) Businesses generally greatly underestimate the risk of future accidents.

B ) Businesses are as concerned with long-term as they are with short-term strategies for maximizing profits.

C) Businesses generally do the environmentally “right” thing only if doing so makes good business sense.

D) Businesses treat fines that are levied against them as an ordinary business expense.

E) Businesses are learning to exploit the public’s environmental awareness in promoting themselves.

I am not 100% certain in understanding why A is correct and why D is incorrect.

Thank you.

Does anyone know what the scheduled date for October score release is? LSAC just says TBD.

I'd feel more comfortable taking this test if I know scores will be sent before Thanksgiving.

A question like this was posted before but it is kinda dated. So basically should I first do PT 36 then do like 40 then do most of my PT from 50-70 and leave couple of 80s before 2 weeks or something from my exam date?

On the last few PT's i've taken, all in the high 70s, i've noticed that i'm getting more of the harder questions right and some pretty easy (sometimes completely obvious) questions wrong. Just goes to show that we can't take the easier questions for granted.

I'd figure this would be something to laugh about!

I know July takers will have the unique option to cancel their score and retake the test free of charge. What I want to know is, what if I want to retake but don't want to cancel my score? Does that mean I have to cough up another 200 bucks to LSAC?

Can someone provide me with an example of what "distorts an argument against X, and then attacks this distorted argument" would look like?

PT C2, Section #3, Question #6 Answer Choice D

This game has virtually no rules to solve MPT questions.

During PT, I spent 15 minutes for the first 3 games, but I couldn’t finish game 4 in 20 minutes. I technically guess the last 4 answers because there are infinite possibilities.

I must did something terribly wrong. Please help.

Admin note: edited title

Hi 7sage community.

Question - do I do a full practice test under timed conditions with BR or just practice timed sections individually with BR before Monday? Or forego timed practice until after Monday and hit it hard for the fall date?

A brief background on where I am at:

I sat for March test after beginning studies with Kaplan books in January. Bombed the LG section (went at least -17) but got a 155, which was my PT average going into the test. I did 6 or 7 full (5 section and writing) practice tests leading up to March so I am familiar with the format, the "sprint", resetting my watch to the 12 between sections, bubbling in to not leave points on the table if time is low, and some of those little tricks.

Between March and June I had to catch up at work with projects I had left on the backburner from the beginning of the year (I work around 50 hours a week). I began the 7sage CC in earnest at the beginning of June. I haven't done it all, but I've been through every subsection for at least some of it. I spent the bulk of my time firming up my foundational and advanced logic skills (immensely helpful).

I'm sitting on Monday and haven't done a PT since March. Should I practice the whole thing or just practice each section, timed with BR? I am taking the rest of the week off and will let my brain rest Saturday and Sunday.

Also worried about what a low PT score will do to confidence heading into the test on Monday.......................... and even considering skipping timed practice for now.

I am fully committed to a LOT of PT and BR between Monday and the September or October test. Definitely doing one of those which will be my final attempt.

Lastly, I am accepted for fall 2020 at my top choice (local public school) so I am just trying to raise my score for financial aid purposes. This year's incoming 1L class had a median score of 157.

THANK YOU!

Kat

Despite having gone through the core curriculum and JY's explanation videos multiple times, where he frequently skips around to local questions with premises before tackling global ones, I still approach logic games questions in order unless I'm really stuck. I've found in the past that LG questions often build on inferences from previous questions, something you might miss if you skip around.

Anyone have a particularly firm opinion on either approach? Would love to hear your thoughts!

Does anyone understand why the answer to question 20 is A. I do not see how the statement that "many local businesses depend on the regions natural beauty" is direct evidence for another statement aka is direct evidence for the statement that "the heavy industrial activity of coal mining would force most of them to close".

Admin note: edited title

Hey, if anyone has taken this PT yet, can someone explain why the right answer is the right one?

I was able to eliminate the 4 wrong AC's during my BR but I still can't come up with why the right AC is correct.

Can anyone help me please?

Thanks!

#help

Admin note: edited title

Hi.

I needed to improve logical reasoning skills so I took a simple argument and tried if I can come up with imaginary correct answers for different question types on my own. What do you guys think? Do you think I did any of them incorrectly?

Argument: You can't get a tattoo. Your aunt Barbara got a tattoo, and she is in jail.

Flaw: Assumes that I will have the same consequence as aunt Barbara if i get a tattoo like her.

Weaken: Some people who has a tattoo did not end up in jail

Strengthen: Most people who got a tattoo ended up in jail

Sufficient Assumption: A new legislation states that "anyone who gets a tattoo ends up in jail."

Necessary Assumption: There are at least some people besides aunt Barbara who got a tattoo and now in jail.

Parallel flaw: Last night, I saw a video of a black cat that was taught to use a toilet, our kitty is also black, so she could be taught to use a toilet.

I understand that necessary condition has to be 100% true while sufficient is more of a "good enough" explanation for if something else is true. But when I look at examples I am confused on determining which is the sufficient and which is the necessary in "only if", "is" and "any" situations. (I have watched the videos like 3x already and still it makes no sense)

For instance, Earth is the only home we've ever known. What it says in the examples is Earth is the necessary but only home is the sufficient. I don't understand how this is the case? Does anyone have an easier way of explaining it?

In every webinar and in most student testimonials, people mention identification of patterns as being one of the key processes to answering quickly and accurately. Are these patterns more than identifying what kind of question it is? Do they mean the structure of the questions themselves (premises, conclusions, fluff)? Or is there a formula for each question type that goes beyond any of that?

Can someone explain why C is right and E wrong? Is it bc C aligns with the hypothesis and is what we would expect assuming the hypothesis is true, whereas for E, E allows a scenario where seals start off ignoring whales that do not eat seals, which would go against the hypothesis?

Also, I felt the language about the seals “ignoring” the not threatening whales confusing. It took me while to figure out that “ignoring” just meant not being scared of them and even being willing to go close to them. It’s the opposite of “aversion”. Anyone else got tripped up on this?

Admin note: edited title

Admin note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-87-section-2-question-18/

Can someone explain why is B right and C wrong for this argument part question? Tough question.

Admin note: edited title