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/

Hello,

I have trouble seeing if something is actually required, even after applying the negation test and asking myself if the AC is giving more than is required, or fills the gap and is not actually required. If anything, I tend to see that the Negation Test wrecks the argument more often that I should, and wrongly choose that one thing that seems seemingly unrelated but I thought would wreck the argument.

Ex) Because we locked the door, no one can break into our house

A. Required: there are no other ways to break into the house

B. Required: one cannot break into the house going through the chimney

C. Not required: None of the windows can be opened

D. Not required: The door is the only way in and out of the house, and the lock is impenetrable.

I see why A and B is required. But I don't really see why C are D are not. I can see why D offers information that is extra, "and the lock is impenetrable", but why is C not required? Negation for C: Some of the windows can be opened. Doesn't that wreck the argument? Someone can break in now. What is the difference between C and B?

Another example:

When exercising the muscles in one's back, it is important to maintain a healthy back, to exercise the muscles on opposite sides of the spine equally. After all, balanced muscle development is needed to maintain a healthy back, since the muscles on opposite sides of the spine must pull equally in opposing directions to keep the back in proper alignment and protect the spine.

Which of the following is an assumption required by the argument?

A. Muscles on opposite sides of the spine that are equally well developed will be enough to keep the back in proper alignment.

B. Exercising the muscles on opposite sides of the spine unequally tends to lead to unbalanced muscle development.

Equally exercise muscles->pull in equal directions->healthy back.

I chose A. Negation: Muscles on opposite sides of the spine that are equally well developed WILL NOT be enough to keep the back in proper alignment. I know stating something is important doesn't mean that it alone will be sufficient to produce the outcome, but it seems to wreck the idea that this is important to do (conclusion). I know it's not 100%, but neither is B to me.

I eliminated B immediately glossing over it because we are talking about spines that are exercised equally, not unequally. Negation: Exercising the muscles on opposite sides of the spine unequally DOES NOT tend to lead to unbalanced muscle development. It wrecks the idea that exercising both sides equally is important. Why do I have to exercise both sides of my back equally if when I am exercising them unequally, it doesn't produce unbalanced muscle development anyway? But how is this a better answer that A? If anything I think it is more out of scope than A. We aren't specifically talking about spines that are not exercised unequally or unbalanced muscle development. Yeah, not exercising both sides equally may not produce the outcome of unbalanced muscle development, but I am not trying to avoid unbalanced muscle development, I am trying to fulfill balanced muscle development. What is not necessary to produce an outcome doesn't mean it should be neglected!

I hate "understanding" the questions only after the fact. I want to really understand how to tackle these types of questions.

Does anyone know any tips/tricks/insights that will help with other questions like these onward?

THANK YOU :)

What's the difference between AC "D" and "E"?

Admin note: edited title

Hi guys so I review my logic games with the 7 sage videos on Youtube, but something I found I have difficulty with is determining or knowing when to use sub game boards. I have found that sometimes I have made them and they dnt require which confuses me. I try to think that of there is a variable that is limited to 2 or 3 positions to create sub game boards, but this has backfired on me a couple times.I appreciate any help or advice! Thank you

I’ve been focusing on NA/SA questions for the last two weeks, and took another PT,

Only to get an exactly same score:)

I’m happy with getting all NA/SA questions right, but now I’m getting flaw questions wrong.

Accuracy dropped to 43%.

I know I’ll work on flaw questions, but is there something I’m missing? Should I work on different types of questions while working on my weaknesses? Could there possibly be a correlation in learning more things about NA types that makes me weaker with flaw questions? It felt somehow harder to predict flaw question answers during the most recent PT.

Just took my first digital lsat prep test and my score suffered greatly because i have trouble reading from the tablet and overall just underlining and highlighting was difficult from my ipad. Anyone else have a similar issue?

#help

After reviewing, I can see why the wrong answer choices are wrong, but I cannot also tell you why C is the right answer. To me is just does not make sense. To me I thought this if anything would strengthen the argument.

Admin note: edited title

I foolproofed all the games in the core curriculum (including the problem sets included with the starter package). Afterwards, I took PT 37 and was able to solve 2 out of 4 games in the section, which was an improvement from being able to solve a total of zero games. Next, I completed the RC section of the CC, and my LG skills have gotten rusty to the point where I can barely solve one out of 4 games in the section.

I'm not sure whether I should foolproof the games in the CC again, or foolproof the games in Pt's 19-35 (I can't seem to find the PT book for 1-19). Appreciate any advice with this. Pretty anxious cause I'm signed up for June, and I seem to completely suck at games.

I always take too much time on the first half of the section and rush to the second time. I've taken 10 preptests so far, and 7 of which I have at least one LR section I couldn't finish on time. Is that common?

It's always questions that are worded too long that trips me up, and also I always (try) eliminate all the wrong answers when I take them. Could that be the reason as to why it's taking me so long?

Hi!

This is killing me! Why can JNOP be a correct answer just because we happened to pick J first? Okay, if J is the necessary then O and N can go in too and also because they are OR groups and so both can be in S okay. But then why can't be in S as well? This doesn't make any sense to me. NOJ are in because its an /N--> and /O-->J as an OR group. But its /K-->P as an OR group so why can't K be there too like N and O were?

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-34-section-4-game-2/

So on question 12 JY mentioned a bi conditional because there was a /S-->H, /H-->S, and also a S-->/H, and a H-->/S. However, to get the first set of conditionals, the original chain was /S-->J-->H. Can you simply say that this= /S-->H? I wasn't aware that you could do this. In a conditional chain don't you need all the elements? Or can you just remove the J and write this as another separate statement? This doesn't make sense to me

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-33-section-4-game-2/

I feel like soon as I can cement this I will be good! I'm challenged to properly identify whether one can pronounce 'X' or 'Y' of a given statement as a certain condition BECAUSE the logical indicator preceded it or not. Are there circumstances with rules for when it does not? I keep getting caught in the confusion between how to label what is before and after the logical indicator. And yes, I have gone through the lessons on this.

J.Y. can you assist with this #help

Why is A the right answer? Isn't A just the contrapositive of E?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-30-section-2-question-21/

Admin note: edited title

Hello. I have been following the blind review method for some time now, but I always fall short of two or three questions for logical reasoning section when I am doing the timed LSAT and it is so frustrating. It is even more frustrating when the score I get is not to my expectations and it just feeds my self doubt. Do any of you guys have similar issue? Any tips for completing the LSAT sections on time?

Hi!

In this game and all the explanations it seems to be implicit that, while M or P can threepeat, they cannot repeat again the same subcomittee I.E. you can have PGH but you can't have PGP even though, even if this were true, all members could still serve on at least subcommittee- why can't M or P be used 4 times? Nothing was explicitly stated in the rules.

admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-46-section-4-game-4/

Hi Everyone,

I've been going back to the core curriculum to brush up on a few things, and I realized that I rely more on what JY calls the "carve-out" method of dealing with embedded conditionals rather than the translation. (It just feels more intuitive for me.) But as I was trying to match up my "carve-out" understanding with the translations JY does, I ended up with a few questions.

Here's the link to the CC lesson with the example I'm considering: https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/mastery-embedded-conditional/

"If the seeds are planted in the winter, then flowers will not blossom unless fertilizer is applied."

JY draws these two statements using the "and" translation:

SPW and FB -> FA

SPW and /FA -> /FB

So I like to think about this by relying heavily on the "unless" factor at the end:

My question is, aren't JY's statements (and my own) supposed to be biconditionals? For example:

So together, FA (-) (SPW ->FB)

Because right now, in JY's statements, if I know fertilizer is applied (FA), nothing happens. If I plug in FA, then it fulfills the necessary for the first translation and fails the sufficient for the second. But isn't it true that if FA, then it must be true that if seeds are planted in the winter, that the flowers will blossom?

Hi all -- this question just has me stumped altogether. I would really appreciate it if someone could walk me through their thought process! In particular, if there are also tips on how to get through this kind of question faster (it's so fuzzy because it's MSS with a MBT-esque stimulus), that would also be really helpful.

#help

I am unable to fully comprehend this question and cannot materialize it into an example involving actual numbers (this question seems like a math question to me). Is anyone able to help using examples? Thank you!

Admin note: edited title

test

Hello 7sagers,

Just looking for opinions on the most efficient way you all have full proof logic games with a full time job and studying lay daily. I take a timed section almost everyday so I'm trying to figure out that balance. I am focusing on getting through the set up and understanding how to make inferences more than the questions right now. I dont really know if doing it 8 to 10 times is the most efficient way to master the games. Sounds like a lot of printing. Any advice on systems or should I just do it ?

What category would "Identify the Role" fall in? Where can I find more practice questions for this type of question within 7sage?

Someone help me out here? I have a vague understanding of why C is the right answer, though I naively selected A. Best explanation I could come up with is that there will always be not obese kids being born into the population, regardless of the percentage increase of obese kids.

Would it be safe to almost immediately disregard conditional statements as a correct AC in MC questions? I haven't come across a conclusion that is a conditional statement since those would always be premises leading to some conclusion? Does anyone have a counter-example that disproves this?

Thank you!

Im just confused about the correct answer choice. In the stimulus it says "quite probably" but in the correct AC "D" we are told "is". Can someone please help me understand how this type of jump is acceptable?

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-69-section-4-question-17/