My question is how to translate: the only obligation is to act in the best interests of their own side. Does obligation here act as a necessity indicator? So Does this mean that if something is in the best interest of either party the party is required to act on it? or that if there is an obligation for either party the party must act in their own best interest?

Admin note: edited title

Anyone have tips on how to best practice formal logic? I'm really getting beat up on those NA/SA questions :(

I need an explanation for this question, please!

So I've been noticing a lot of what I'm getting wrong are questions that are ranked 4-5 on difficulty, and some 3's. No surprise there, but I'm wondering if it would be effective to only drill using questions that are max difficulty? Might be a silly question idk. Any tips for studying when getting more of the difficult questions wrong?

Hey! Can someone please explain what this answer choice means/give an example of when it would be correct?

Hi there! I am having a horrible time focusing during RC, especially when it is last out of the 4 sections,

Any pointers or courses dedicated to concentration?

I haven't been able to consistently do better than -10 on LR, though I am not missing a certain type of question- it greatly varies. Would it be more likely to be a result of carelessness/overthinking, or a fundamental issue? How should I approach trying to fix this?

I am not understanding JY’s (or any other online) explanation as to why the answer is A. I’m not understanding how he gets from “If important AND well written then published therefore If important then published.”

Is the idea that importance implies that it also well written?? Or is it that the “and” there is really functioning as an “or”? If it’s functioning as an “or”, why? Thanks in advance!

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

I'm a very visual learner/processor and the format of the RC passages on the screen is super frustrating to me. I wish there was a way you could see the passage in its entirety and the separation of paragraphs without having to scroll so much. Does anyone else struggle with this or have any recommendations?

I am booked to take the LSAT in August, I have been studying since June already and am currently scoring around 150, though I feel I am making stupid mistakes and score better just doing sections rather then actual prep tests. Is there still time for me to bring my score up before the August LSAT? Also I have been a little confused on the blind review, any advice?

So yeah, for LR, the vast majority of questions that I am missing I picked the right answer first, only to then start doubting myself, usually thinking "this answer is too easy/obvious, it HAS to be a another one" and end up picking a wrong one. Ugh, why does this keep happening? Is there a way to stop second-guessing myself???

My weakest point for RC is law passages (lol). I am trying to read more law based articles so I don't burn through Passages. Does anyone have any resources for law articles that they would recommend?

i really need to keep myself on point with the lsat, i know cool libraries we can hold group study sessions at, print pts and go over them in person and stuff like that. lmk thanks

When I do drills, I can get the question right. When I go to take practice tests, I miss a significant number of questions. Does anyone have any suggestions?

As today is LG's official funeral, would anyone like to say any last words before the sweet chariot swings low? I am testing today, and plan to give them the love they deserve (3(/p)

Perhaps the magazine has worked for you, but I find the economist to be very soft reading material and unsatisfactory for RC improvement. For a food analogy, It's like chewing Gerber baby food, when RC passages are like tough sinewy steak.

However, I will say that what seems to work for me is reading philosophy books, in particular books by Daniel dennett. I'm currently reading his book Intuition Pumps, and after reading a few chapters of it, when I do rc passes, I feel myself breezing through them. (I know he's most famous as a new atheist, but his philosophical insights are his most impressive contributions to thought in my opinion).

If you're struggling with RC give him a try. Freedom Evolves, Brainstorms, etc. He has many books from decades of writing. Also, consider that every lsat question you've ever read was written by someone who was either a philosophy PhD or in pursuit of a philosophy phd. The two subjects , LSAT and philosophy, seem to be almost the same thing. Best luck to all, keep studying!

While going over the formal Lawgic section, I was thinking about what questions type do we use formal Lawgic? For example, is it in Sufficient assumption questions, Flawed, etc.? IDK help?? I would like to look at some questions and try to use formal Lawgic.

I read online that Ctrl+F was replaced by a new search feature. Is this true? If so, are there any notable limitations to its replacement, such as character count? What will the new search feature look like? Is there a way I can try it out prior to my official LSAT?

When it comes to LR, I've noticed that I tend to get the higher difficulty questions wrong. I feel as though I have a solid fundamental understanding of the concepts, question types, and methods of thinking, though I still consistently get the more difficult ones wrong. I know it may be a bit ironic since that is the point of higher difficulty questions, though I would like to be able to conquer them before my August LSAT. Any tips?

As I've been taking practice LR sections, I've noticed that my range of wrong answers varies drastically. I don't struggle with any particular question type or difficulty level, so I'm not sure how to improve my score. For example, I will get like 8 questions wrong, each in a different category, ranging from 5/5 difficulty to 2/5 difficulty. Is it just a matter of practice? Please help! :)

Hi everyone! I have completed the 7sage curriculum and have been drilling for a little over 2 weeks, but I am still averaging -9 on all my LR sections. I have been studying for the LSAT since May 1st and the only other resource I have used is The LSAT Trainer. I would like to get my hands on The Loophole by Ellen Cassidy but I cannot find it anywhere online. I plan to take my LSAT in September and my goal score is 165.

In terms of question types, I struggle with MBT, weakening, and necessary assumptions. I believe that I need to review the foundations of conditional logic but the core curriculum lessons aren't really helping. If anyone could briefly explain with an example how conditional logic works that would be greatly appreciated!

It is becoming increasingly frustrating not seeing results and I was wondering if anyone had any external resources or tips on how to finally break through in my studies. I would also appreciate any advice on how to stay focused throughout an entire test without getting sidetracked as I find myself taking substantially longer on questions near the end of a section.

I figured since there is no explanation video on this one, I'd offer my two cents. Please feel free to respond if my explanation is lacking anything or if you have a better one.

So the correct AC is B and here is why. The stimulus tells us that essentially that scientists relying on social reasons like prestige is not actually a bad thing when they are accepting arguments because social reasons are used to influence every human endeavor. The reason why this is the flaw is because it essentially relies on the fact that this justification is used so often as a valid reason to justify this claim. We know this because social reasons are stated to influence every human behavior, highlighting the frequency of use. The principle behind this argument is "if a justification is used frequently then the justification is valid. But obviously this is not true, just because a justification is used frequently it doesn't mean it is at all a valid way of supporting the argument. I mean we can even use real life examples to really highlight how wrong this claim is. Human emotions also influence every human endeavor, does that mean scientists are justified in accepting scientific arguments based on human emotions and is it right that doing so isn't detrimental? Of course not, doing so would lead to so many biases and flawed groundless conclusions.

I'll also disprove C because it seems to be a popular AC. The reason why this is not the correct AC is because it is not the flaw. This AC is saying that the argument does not consider the fact that these scientists in addition to relying on social reasons also consider relevant evidence when accepting these claims. This actually sounds like it is strengthening the argument. Now we have evidence that these scientists are not just blindly accepting arguments based on social reasons and that there is actually some actual definitive evidence behind these justifications.

This is how I explained this question to myself, I'm curious to know your thoughts.

Hello!

Could anyone explain to me why answer choice B doesn't mimic the flaw in the stimulus like answer choice C does? I watched the video and spent some time with it on my own, but I am still lost! This is the question on artificial sweetener and aspartame

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

I am registered for the August LSAT and I was wondering, for those who took the June test, how people's at-home testing experience was. I personally am leaning towards taking it at the crib, but I want to hear what other people are doing.

Admin note: Edited title. Please do not post threads or comments in all caps. This is against the Forum Rules. Thanks!

I swear I remember learning in one of the lessons that the lawgic if A then B and C can be rewritten as if A and B then C and vise versa but I can't find that lesson anywhere and am not sure if I just made that rule up in my head. Is this lawgic logical?