Hi all!

I just have a question regrading And + Or in the SC and NC and what happens when you Satisfy the SC through Valid Argument Form #1 and Deny the NC through Valid Argument Form #2. Here is where my thinking is at right now if any of you can correct me please do!!

Or in the Sufficient Condition

Valid Argument Form #1: Satisfying the Sufficient Condition

A or B --> C

Because it is an or statement there are three ways that can you can possibly satisfy the Sufficient Condition and conclude C.

Valid Argument Form #2: Denying the Necessary Condition

A or B --> C

When you deny the Necessary Condition by saying /C you can end up with 3 possibilities.

And in the Necessary Condition

Valid Argument Form #2: Denying the Sufficient Condition

A --> B and C

When you say /B and /C you conclude /A because B and C are jointly necessary they must both be denied.

I know there is an answer to this question out there, but I am really confused on the conditional logic here. If someone can break that down for me, it would greatly help me understand when the other answer choices are wrong and further help me see why D is right.

#help

Hi everyone,

I tried searching in the discussions and the CC but wasn't able to find what I'm looking for... feel free to redirect me if there's already a lesson/thread that covers this.

Can anyone provide me with an example of a Flaw type problem where it mistakes a necessary condition for a sufficient condition as well as a problem where it mistakes a sufficient condition for a necessary condition?

I conceptually understand what mistaking one for the other looks like when written in lawgic but would like to see how this looks like in an LSAT problem.

Thank you!

Freedom of speech is the only rational policy for this government to adopt.

Is this a biconditional sentence?

Im drilling between preptests and I have been "drilling" but instead of doing new questions i focus on all the question types I have done in my previous preptests. Has anyone else done this before? Is it effective? or should I focus on material I havent seen before from earlier preptests? or both

I just wanna clarify something. So i will start the LG section soon.. do you guys recommend i start fool proofing games during the CC or afterwards? and i do have access to PTs 1-35 so i can get the LG bundle.. can you guys tell me when and for what reason should I do the bundle? is that where i start fool proofing? I would really appreciate it if someone can clear this up for me.

FYI i will take the July test so maybe i should go with a different strategy?

THANKS IN ADVANCE! :)

I am struggling very much with most strongly supported questions. Sometimes I will do problem sets and get 4/5 and then sometimes I get 2/5. I've noticed that reading carefully and looking for key words are a good technique but what other strategies do you have for MSS questions? Thank you.

Hi everyone I have been struggling with finding the strengthens but mostly the weakness of an argument? Any tips on how to master it? Because I been practicing and practicing and still struggling with the section. :(

Hey guys so im retaking the lsat in September 2019. I scored pretty bad in the Feb 2018** test then took a year off because I just didnt feel good enough. But after much time off, I just feel like I could do so much better! I scored a 150 and honestly my problem is with LR ! If I was untimed which I know is of zero value, I get -3/4 but add time and boom -9/10 per LR section. For logic Games, Its actually my strongest section averaging about -2/3 per section. I am aiming for 168–170 because my top choice is Fordham Law School (3.8 gpa) and Boston College. Im studying about an 1-2 hours everyday sometimes more depending on work and schedule! Any tips? is it doable? I used blueprint last time, and it was a great course but very fast in my opinion. I am currently using the bibles, I like the question breakdown and details but I also have the trainer that ill be using as well. I have about 5.5 months. Also if anyone needs an accountability or online study partner, I’m so interested:) any tips/study suggestions are welcome?

Hi. Im studying for the June LSAT and (like most people) am having trouble with SE questions. While watching on of JY's game explanation videos for PT 66 and noticing some differences in they way he set up his board and they way I set up mine, I thought of a potential strategy that may or may not be good and was hoping to get some feedback from others about what they might think of it.

Normally, I have not bothered to even try to answer SE questions on timed PT's and had adhered to this in this case (PT 66, section 3, Q11). However, upon my first reworking of the game I attempted it and actually found it to be relatively easy. The key was that (unlike JY's) my boards had been split on the node of the exact inference that was being substituted. Having these relevant sub-game boards already at my disposal saved me the time and trouble of possibly splitting on that inference for the question, and were extremely helpful in the knock out/sneak in process. Perhaps more importantly, having already worked the game and questions with an understanding of that relevant rule as the primary determinant of the possible worlds of the game had instilled me with a deep understanding of how that rule functioned in the creation of worlds by the time I came to the final question and allowed me to quickly and confidently asses the answer choices.

The potential strategy I am putting up for discussion is whether or not it could be helpful to, at the start of each new game, check the final question of that game to see if it is SE. If it is, then might the rule that is being replaced within it be the rule that implies the key inference along which you should strongly consider splitting your board? I feel as if this step could easily be added to the checklist of things to do at the start of each game and could be extremely beneficial. I am not suggesting a rigid following of this and I am sure that in some cases it is best to split along nodes that are not mentioned in SE questions. However, after looking through some past games that include SE questions, it seems to me that these games are often structured towards building an understanding of the inferences created by the rule being replaced, an understanding that must be funneled into the last Q for a final comprehensive test. At the very least, if it doesn't make since to split along the replaced rule, knowing the SE Q is coming, and having the functioning of the rule in the back of your head as you work through the Q's, might be very helpful.

Hi guys,

I want to make an argument and delete LSAT 25, S2, Q10 from the problem set because the answer choice is poorly written.

Without diving too deeply what the question is saying, it is about some spider webs that emits UV and conclusion is that the insects get attracted because of the pattern.

Naturally, after reading the question, the weakest spot from the argument that I had naturally draw without reading the answer choices has to do with this specific pattern and maybe it connects with "food or mating".

And the answer choice E, which is the correct answer choice because it proves that okay insects are attracted to the UV. But that is entirely restating the premise. The answer choice is made correct because we got A, B, C irrelevant and answer choice D being 180. SO answer choice E, which doesn't do anything that sort of just rephrase the premise, being the right answer.

Please let me know how you feel. And if you feel that the answer choice certainly strengthens I be very honored to hear your reasoning because I just don't see how answer choice E is different from confirming the premise and the gap still leaves untouched.

Admin note: edited title

I've done some number crunching and determined the rest of my schedule for leading up to the June 2019 LSAT (~27 days away). I am studying full-time currently. I am currently fool-proofing logic games and have about 90 hours of logic game study left. This makes my study schedule as follows:

Now until May 22nd: Logic Games fool-proofing

May 23rd to June 1st: 6 full-length practice tests (one full day for a test and one full day for each review)

June 2nd: rest day

June 3rd: LSAT

Does 7Sage think I should change my schedule up leading up in June LSAT?

Hi All. I am curious to know some techniques or strategies on how people have been studying. Are you doing ALL the problem sets directly after the lessons? For example for MSS questions, are you doing all the problem sets in a row? Saving some for later days? What have you found helpful in regards to this? I hear from people the best way to get better is to continue to do problems; However, my worry is that by the time I get to the Logic Games or reading comprehension, I would have already completed all the problem sets for the logical reasoning. Looking forward to hearing your thoughts. Thank you.

Hey Peeps,

So I'm currently working my way through the core curriculum, albeit hella slowly!

I was just wondering what are some of your thoughts on following your intuition when answering logical reasoning questions versus mapping/writing everything (conditional statements, necessary conditions, sufficient conditions, etc.) out?

I imagine using one's intuition is much faster but of course sometimes intuition can fail you.

I am just really confused of why the right answer is B.

My thought process was this:

C: It is advisable for businesses to implement such variations.

Why? because of all the information above. When I read this I thought there was an assumption between all businesses having a standard software. Writing this out, I see why this is wrong, but I also do not see why B would strengthen this.

Answers the way I saw them:

A: This is right. In my head this reinforced the assumption I thought I saw

B: So what? We never mentioned cost

C: Again, money is never mentioned. But also, it was mentioned that they were compatible. So this is pointless

D - This might weaken the argument b/c even if we fix one issue, there is another issue anyway. Also, what are destructive computer programs?

E: So what? These businesses want to do that. Even if they do not, it does not strengthen anything

#help

So I got this correct, but only on the basis that I knew this was a medium leveled question. I cannot fully eliminate A and need additional help.

When I read this my initial instinct was to say how do we know that 62% is representative. Again, after knowing this was a medium level questioned I felt that A was too easy to fall for and I re-read the stimulus and saw it mentioned that it wanted to increase readership. With that this is what followed:

A - Could not eliminate

B - So what that other journals have done this? We just care about this journal and what they are doing.

C - I choose this because out of the other answers this felt like it mentioned both that representative discrepancy mentioned AND the want for the increased readership. However, I am still not entirely confident in this answer choice

D - So what about the cost?

E - So what?

#help

Should I be doing timed LR sections from like 40s and 50s because I find that when I take it timed? I want to take the July test for sure, so I am trying to do evens PTS 60s through now by then.

I sometimes get like -9, but BR is just -2 or -3. I am trying to improve my LR score because I'm stuck in the 160s, but in BR I get like 170-175.What suggestions do you guys have?

Hello,

I downloaded the 7Sage app with the 35 minute Test Proctor. I have an accommodation for the test, and was wondering if the proctor be adjusted to 53 minutes? Thanks for your help in advance.

Hey all, I have roughly a month to go until the June LSAT, and I need to brush up on my conditional reasoning fundamentals from the ground up, as it relates to Logic Games. I've tried to start with intro to grouping games but have found his list of conditional statements and their implied conditional relationships incomprehensible. Which videos should I begin with to have a solid foundation for understanding conditionality in situations like grouping games?

Thanks!

In one of the CC lessons an individual by the username "CharlesOak" asks a very interesting question regarding the BR method that sadly did not garner a reply. So, here's to hoping that it will be seen and answered here !

"For the Diagnostic test should we complete it by section doing BR or should we take the full test first and then do our review? I assume we should take it by section with timed conditions and BR, instead of actually doing the whole thing in one sitting and later on reviewing. I just wanted to confirm."

Basically, when working on LR,or other specific sections, do we take timed sections individual from the other sections, or, do we take the entirety of the test every single time.

Currently just starting my studying and am initially going to tackle my studying systematically---learning the foundational principle(s) for each individual section before taking them along side each-other. I'm not completely sure if this is the correct way about going about it, but it is my study style! That being said, I'm all ears (I guess eyes) and more than willing to listen (err, i guess see) any recommendations or tips for studying :)

P.s. I realise there are several similar posts, but, none that quite ask what I am asking. In essence, just to beat the metaphorical dead horse here, I want to attack particular parts of the test. Much like a sprinter will work solely on their start--tracking the time it takes them to react etc. to the starting pistol---What I am unsure about is whether the results I develop/times I achieve while doing timed individual sections separate from others will translate when I begin taking the entire test. In theory, I do not see why it wouldn't, but I am no expert.

Hi All,

The last sentence of the paragraph 2 reads: '...they argue that as the quality of black schools improved relative to that of white schools....'

J.Y. explains that from this, we cannot infer whether the quality of white schools remained the same, improved, and decreased. I understand this, but am wondering what the different interpretations of the sentence would be in the 3 scenarios.

What I think (assigning numbers as indicators of 'quality'):

Say the white schools originally were 10, black schools 5.

(1) In the case that white schools improved to 15, the net increase in quality for them would be 5. Therefore, whatever increase in quality of the black schools would have to be greater than +5, whether it be 11 or 12 (must be at minimum 11)

(2) In the case that white schools remained the same, then black schools can increase in any amount (but given the context of the passage, unlikely that it would supersede that of the white schools' original, 10)

(3) In the case that white schools decreased, say to 8 (so -2), black schools can increase in any amount, say 1, because that is still a greater than a -2.

Before J.Y.'s explanation, what I thought (1) would be meant if white schools improved to 15 (+5), black schools would also increase by +5 to 10. If this were the case, would the sentence have read: '...they argue that as the quality of black schools improved in parallel to that of white schools....'?

Please let me know what you think!

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-15-section-1-passage-4-passage/

Cakes that do not taste good do not contain the right amount of flour.

Is it Cake not taste good--> /contain the right amount of flour?

I know this question is pretty old but I am trying to improve on Flaw questions. Could anyone explain why ACA is the correct answer? It seems that the argument is addressing both the dating of wills and the superseding of previous wills thus addressing the entire problem previously discussed. Is the problem, however, that the argument treats this smaller solution to a minor problem of a much bigger problem, as a solution to that much bigger problem? I choose ACB so this question definitely tripped me up. Thanks!

so i'm a junior in college and i'm going home for the summer and just devoting my time to studying for the LSAT (full time). so i was wondering what the best way to study. like should i study 35-40 hours a week? or take my time getting through the core curriculum and then do practice tests? i'm not sure how to plan my schedule to finish on time and have the most effective way of studying (i did really bad on my diagnostic i got in the 130s so i have a lot of work to do). but yeah if anyone could help me figure out the best way to study that would be great!

Hi guys,

Please help if you can. The question is filled with technical terms, which I know that I should just replace it. But then, the answer choices put in more of those terms and I literally felt like my brain just had blown up after doing this one single question.

But in any case, I have some questions. Please help and it may help to strengthen your ability too because the question I guess is not an easy one.

When it comes to this kind of questions, what is your approach in terms of understanding what this question is saying?

When it comes to the answer choices, with some fuzzy knowledge of what had just happened, how do you choice the correct one? For example, please take a look at answer choice C. The state of my brain was already blown up after reading and analyzing the stimulus and this term "cerebrospinal fluid" gets throw in. Naturally I picked it with the hope that JY will say in the video "we don't know that". I mean where did the stimulus say about fluids? Isn't it about some stuff attacking some other stuff.

How do you understand answer choice A?

In the end of all the elimination, I have A & C left. And I finally eliminated A, the correct answer. My brain process went like the following:

It says "Gamma interferon stops white blood cells from producing myelin-destroying compounds". But wait, white blood cell produce myelin? What is this dash doing here? What does destroying compounds mean? Isn't the problem that white blood cell is killing the myelin instead of producing it? Does Gamma stop white blood cell? All I know is that Gamma doesn't work.

In the end, I am left with an answer choice A that I could hardly understand and answer choice C with a term" spinal fluid". So I guessed for C.

Please let me know how you would approach the problem and how your mind works when you are reading this kind of passage which is filled with technical terms and your approach to answer choice A & C.

Thanks in advance.

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-35-section-4-question-22/