Hey everyone, just have a general quesiton regarding the fool proof method of logic games. Should I be also answering the quesitons when i fool proof games or just stick with set-up, inferences etc? I seem to find that by repeated game 5 or above the answers just seem to be too easy because i have basically memorized them at that point. Your thoughts would be greatly appreciated. Thanks everyone!

Im trying to look for answers to the LR questions from PT 9. Before the digital change, you could enter it manually or find them. Now, its forcing me to take the test digital first

Hello good people,

I've been receiving lots of PMs here and on reddit asking more details about the things I posted. Now that the shock has worn off, I'm going to take the time to give back and share some of the things I considered 'game-changers' in my prep. Hopefully it will help you too!

Today I'm going to share a conceptual framework for analyzing arguments. I believe this helped me limit LR mistakes and go -1/-2 sometimes -0 consistently. How? it helped me get the question types below correct most of the time, and it saved me time I would have otherwise wasted deliberating between wrong ACs and still got them wrong anyway––time I used to get to the other questions I would've otherwise never got to.

It is particularly useful for STRENGTHEN/WEAKEN/NECESSARY ASSUMPTION/SUFFICIENT ASSUMPTION questions (all the fun ones!)

Here is it:

Traditionally on 7sage, we look at arguments from the 'vertical' model:

A––>B

A

–––

B

As I progressed on my prep journey, I started to also look at arguments as such:

1 + 1 = 2

(Math? what the hell?!?!) stay with me!

As we know, arguments are PREMISES ––> CONCLUSION.

The mistake we commonly make however, is to attack the premises or the conclusion. That's what we do in day to day conversations. These are the type of LSAT errors that are so frustrating because you know they're wrong, but you're stuck between 2 ACs and you decided to go with the one that 'seemed right' but deep down, you knew something was off.

So, let's look at it again.

1 + 1 = 2

When you are asked to analyze an argument, you NEVER attack the 1s or the 2. Those are the premises and conclusion.

Rather, you attack the = sign. That is the support

In LR, i'm constantly telling myself, "BE SENSITIVE TO THE SUPPORT [STRUCTURE]" so I stay disciplined and stick to what the question type demands of me by addressing the = accordingly.

Let's run through the types:

WEAKEN

Task: you pick an AC that weakens the support [the = sign]

Approach: So you look for an AC that adds a -1

1 + 1 (-1) =/= 2

Great! you just weakened the argument!

STRENGTHEN

Task: you pick an AC that strengthens the support [the = sign] In other words, you further affirm the equation-relationship or block premises that undermine the 'equation'

Approach: You look for an AC that blocks a potential weakener, a (-1), or you look for an AC that further affirms the relationship like a (+1)

1 + 1 (+1) = 2 (or more––so it affirms this relationship)

or you see that -1? yeah that's not applicable like -(-1) which is: 1

Great! you just strengthened the argument!

NECESSARY ASSUMPTION

Task: you pick an AC that the equation (=) NEEDS to remain 1 + 1 = 2.

Approach: Find an AC that enables the equation to hold. How? by blocking competing premises that would subtract from your premises (1+1) and destroy equation's ability to = 2

These are similar to how you do STRENGTHEN, and it's something the Ellen's LOOPHOLE really made clear to me

If I made an argument like:

"X washing machines are better than Y washing machines, because X washing machines dissolve soap detergent faster than Y washing machines"

A loophole would be something like: "wait, what if the rate at which washing machines dissolve soap doesn't matter in evaluating the quality of a washing machine?"

a NECESSARY ASSUMPTION blocks this by saying: it's not the case that (the rate at which washing machines dissolve soap doesn't matter in evaluating the quality of a washing machine) OR it matters.

Back to our equation:

"what if -1?"

and you negate it so: -(-1). which is 1. so the equation remains protected.

But hold on! what about the negation test? simple. If you applied a NEGATION to your AC, the -(-1) or just 1, what do you get? a -1

which is: 1 + 1 (-1) =/= 2 which destroys the argument

Great! you just found the NECESSARY ASSUMPTION!

SUFFICIENT ASSUMPTION

Task: you pick an AC that ensures the equation (=) works

Approach: You look for an AC that is sufficient to make the premises = conclusion

Say you are given

1 ____ = 2

You need a: (+ 1) so 1 +1 = 2

Great! you just found the SUFFICIENT ASSUMPTION

Notice how we NEVER consider poking holes in the premises (1s) or the conclusion (2). Rather we ALWAYS address the SUPPORT (=)

Why so abstract? because if you can see pass the details and understand what you are being asked to do on a simple abstract level, you can sift through the often confusingly-worded ACs and find the right AC confidently and quickly.

Also, are you starting to see how all LR questions are really just similar versions of each other? it's how you can easily turn a weakening question into strengthen, into an NA, or flaw, easily.

I hope this was helpful!

Feel free to PM me if needed!

The Real Mike Ross

Hey guys,

I need a lot more practice on necessary assumption. I wen through all the video but still doesn't feel comfortable :/ where do you guys go to find more questions to practice?

Hi everyone,

I am confused on how to react to my latest LR section score. Under timed conditions, I scored a 7/26 (-19). Horrible. I know. But my Blind review was 17/26 (-9) which is not good but significantly bettter than -19.

Now for the question part of my discussion post. What do I make of this score? How do I make my BR score my timed score?

Thank you,

I'm trying to begin the LG foolproofing, and I've seen a bunch of mentions about the LG Bundle. I know it has been taken down, but I have access to the PT's so was thinking of making a custom set to replicate the questions.

However, are there any specific questions / PT's that come later that you all think would be well-worth adding to the first 35 PTs to foolproof? Or should this suffice for now.

Thanks so much!

I am going over the LR flow chart. Step 0 is to idenify the stem, step 1 is read the stimulus, step 2 is asking is there an argument...my question is this... once i complete step 1 and identify the task shouldnt that tell me if an arguement is going to be there? For example: weaken/strengthen/ main point/ etc pretty much anything that is not strongly supported or inference questions are going to be arguements. So if the stem is a MSS or Infernece then i can eliminate step 2, right? Ive never seen a MBT or MSS with a real argument, but then again i havent seen all questions.

What is going with the LR section? I can't see the answer and explanation.. can someone explain this?

Can someone explain why it's c and not Be? I narrowed it to b and c but chose B because Arg doesn't state that Janson was murdered in his office. I'm

Admin note: edited title; please use the format of "PT#.S#.Q# - [brief description]"

Admin note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-51-section-3-question-20/

Have only taken 1 PT in the 80s. Have taken some in the 70s and they seem slightly harder than the 60s and before that. Is there a difference between 70s and 80s, though?

I just did a question today where usually = most.

e.g. "Kate usually buy juice on Wednesday" --- Wednesday most buy juice

Can I always translate usually to most? Was this mentioned in the CC?

Hello! I'm in the home stretch of studying and looking on how I perform on RC sections, the only questions I continue to get wrong are the Main Point q's and analogy questions. Does anyone have any general tips for these two, specifically?

For example on the analogy questions, I often get down to 2 AC's but there is some nuance I miss that leads me to narrow it down but often choose the wrong one. Same for the MP questions.

Sorry if this is vague or often-answered, just been seeing a pattern and I can't seem to shake it

I have been studying LSAT for 7-8 months, although had just recently joined 7sage and realized how much I have progressed in Logic reasoning. I am now more structured and can breakdown LR question pretty well. However when it comes to answer choices, I tend to pick the most tempting answer choice for the 1st round! I am most of time able to pick the correct answer during blind review. e.g. I would miss 6-8 in one section in 1st try, and miss only 2-3 during BR.

Can anyone offer comments on how I can close this gap? Thank you in advance!

Hi 7Sage community ,

I joined the community to have access to the games videos that were going to be taken down but I swear I read somewhere on this site that we would need Premium and up once they are removed. Unfortunately I can't seem to find where I read that to verify. Can anyone confirm that premium is needed?

Thank you :)

I am a bit worried because I have studying rediculously hard for logic games and I hear that they might be on the cutting room floor? Any chance that it might be come november? Its my best section.

Hey everyone!

I'm taking the November LSAT, and am in the final push for studying. I've gotten my LR and LG consistently up to -0/-1 but the reading comp section is absolutely killing me. Do ya'll have any suggestions besides just practicing to improve active reading and memory? Thank you!!!

Im testing a while from now and dont want to burn through all the recent PTs. Can one legitimately improve LR by using the really old LRs? Anywhere from 1-20?

I am not a student, but a parent, and I am appalled at the lack of professionalism and inhumane conditions my son was subjected to at the DoubleTree Hilton Hotel in Binghamton on October 28th, 2019, after months of preparation for the LSAT. If any student feels the same please speak up and write the LSAT a complaint letter, and post here as well. I will be taking actions.

This is completely unprofessional, inconsiderate, and inhumane.

If this was outsourced, or operated by employees of the administrating board, actions should be taken.

Hey 7Sagers,

Here's the official October 2019 LSAT Discussion Thread.

**Please keep all discussions of the October 2019 LSAT here!**(/red)

Rules:

✅ You can identify experimental sections. 🙆‍♀️

You can say things such as the following:

❌ You can't discuss specific questions. 🙅‍♂️

You CANNOT say things such as the following:

Should I file a testing center complaint?

The proctors were very inefficient, and were very leisurely running the test, while laughing and gossiping with eachother in between giving instructions. It took us an hour and thirty minutes past the start of the exam to actually start.

This was DETRIMENTAL because I am a student with ADHD and my medicine is instant release (lasts only 4-5 hours. The mere wait to get into the room ate up half of my time on my medication.) The second half of the test my medicine was worn off and I could hardly hold focus through a reading passage.

Aside from this I also suffer from anxiety and the wait, and knowledge of my medicine leaving my system with an entire half of the LSAT left certainly harmed my score.

I really dont know what to do. I felt really good about the first half of the test, It's possible I magically did well so I dont necessarily want my score canceled. Im also taking my last lsat next month in the same testing center, and i'm nervous this will happen again.

Honestly, I'm really distraught at how unprofessional this was, I felt really good going into today and now I feel terrible.

Maybe somebody can get something from this story so I decided to share it. Today, I took the LSAT. The first game in LG was not normal and threw me a little so after two min, I skipped it. The 2nd game took me longer than it should have I think. The third game was also very different so after a few min, I skipped it. So here I was almost 15 min in with one game complete and in the back of my mind, I knew that two of the games were weird. Game 4 turned out to be pretty easy then I went back to game 1 and though it was weird, it just clicked and it was very easy to me. After all that, I had over 10 min to do game 3 which was difficult but I got through it and expect I only missed 1 at most. I have never skipped game 1 before and did today and I am confident that i got 22-23 right on the section, don't be afraid to skip anything and most importantly don't panic.

Hey guys im reaching out to anyone that can offer me some advice. I do pretty well untimed and timed I do horribly. I took the June LSAT and scored a 150 and my target is a 168+ Ive been studying since August, and I am signed up for the November exam but I took another practice test and I am still around the same area, Idk why when its times all my organized thought goes out the window I have raging anxiety and I cant think straight and stumble on works. It like the episode of spongebob with all the mini spongebob running around like crazy. Basically it is just extremely hard for me, I have gotten significantly better at Logical reasong although more improvement will help as well as continuously foolproofing LG. My biggest struggle is 100% Reading comprehension I mean like bad I don't know what it is. Anyway I am applying for Fall 2020 cycle if I took the January would that be too late, I pretty much have the rest of my application supplements already done, its just this exam I need to get out of the way. Please anyone help me, I feel like a failure and I just don't know what to do.

(Also aiming for a good school not necessarily a T-14, in terms of application cycle and lsat date)

Hi everyone! I am one month from test day and I'm struggling with LR on PTs. I am solid on all of the theory and CC. Every time I do an untimed section I get almost everything right (-1 to -2). However, during my PTs, every time I hit an LR section I start to miss questions. I usually finish the section on time, but I am still seeing -6 to -7 wrong on each LR section. Does anyone have advice?? I've been studying for a very long time and have seen almost all LR questions.

Hi everyone! I’m taking the lsat tomorrow in Walnut Creek. For those of you who don’t know, Walnut Creek is 15 minutes away from the Lafayette fire. I just called the hotel and they said that they currently don’t have any power and are unsure of when the electricity will come back. Assuming that that electricity is still out tomorrow, will the test be cancelled? If so, will LSAC send a notice? How do reschedules work?

I don't know about you guys but something I have had to contend with since the digital format is striving to read LG rules as accurately as possible. It's just something about the digital format that makes misreading or completely missing a rule more likely for me, which had never been an issue before. On RC and LR this isn't catastrophic but on LG it is, as you will blunder the entire game from such a tiny mistake as missing a "not" within a rule. So here are some tips for those who have encountered the same problem as I did.

Read slow. This is just great across all sections. Slow is smooth, smooth is fast. It's especially hard on LG since we want to bank as much time as possible for the miscellaneous monster, but in the end rushing will more likely cause blunders than it will bank time.

Tick the rules with your highlighter. By ticking I mean just highlight either the first letter or the first word of the rule statement. This way you are accounting that you've taken the rule into consideration. If you try and highlight the whole statement you risk highlighting the rule underneath it by accident as you lift your finger off the screen, fickle as touchscreens are, which has happened to me before.

DON'T FORGET TO TRY TO SCROLL DOWN THE RULES PAGE. This has happened more often then I'd like to admit. You're in the zone, translating your rules, not realizing there are more rules underneath the ones you just wrote until you get to a question and things just aren't making sense. Frustration and panic ensues and throws you out of your focused mode. You can always bounce back from a blunder of course, but it's always best to just avoid it from the beginning.

Return to the rules and set up when no answers appear as correct. Generally you will find that you misread something or missed a rule. Often times this means you have to start the game all over to account for the corrected mistake. You might start to feel dread and start to think "it's not even worth it to finish the section now, I won't have time." Although it's always unpleasant to start over, you shouldn't think you won't finish. Full proofing trains us to finish with extra time and it's always possible to bounce back from a mistake. Perhaps you will have to auto-select for the last three questions, but that still leaves good chances for a strong performances on games.