https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-72-section-3-question-06/

I am having such a tough time on this question. I have written out my thinking, watched the explanation a few times and I am still stumped by this question. Answer C is giving me trouble.

The goal here is to support the author's conclusion that the duration being long and everything else being short is not enough to classify the unusual GRB dichotomously. Two assumptions are being made here: 1) that the long duration is not enough to classify it as long, and 2) having almost everything short is not enough to classify it as short.

With B, I can clearly see now that this answer denies assumption #1. The duration being long would sometimes allow one to classify it as such. This would weaken the argument.

However, C states that ONE instance of a "long" property is less important than other "short" properties.. Wouldn't this deny the assumption #2? If one out of all the number of properties is a long duration and this duration is not as important as those short ones, then why would this answer help the conclusion? By explaining that duration is lower in importance along with the fact that it's severely outnumbered by short properties, the answer seems like it's implying that a "short" classification would be more fitting for this GRB. I do see the words "more important," but a short property that is important surly is more important than a long property that is low/not important.

Any thoughts on this question would be extremely helpful, thank you.

Does anyone have advice on how to actually apply what you're learning from specific questions to similar questions on other tests? I feel that I really do have a grasp on the CC, I understand conditional logic, etc. And when I get a question wrong, I'll go to the explanation and it makes sense to me. But then I take my next PT and I'm consistently missing Flaw, RRE, and Para questions (among many others). How can I best learn from drills and reviews of PTs? Is there some other study method that I'm missing? I'm really sick of getting these questions wrong.

I've heard a lot of advice about taking notes, but I feel that my notes are all specific to the question...

Thank you!

For almost every LR question, I can narrow it down to the trap most popular answer and the correct answer. I usually select the trap answer. How do you go about selecting the correct answer instead? Did anybody come across these issues during studying? How did you deal with it and overcome it?

One of the biggest issues I'm having at breaking the 173 barrier is that my LR scores haven't improved in like 6 months. I am still stuck at a –3 section average, though of course I fluctuate, sometimes I get –5s and sometimes I score –1s. However, I notice that the majority of mistakes I make are ones where I was either careless and lost focus, or where I was down to 2 ACs and chose the wrong one. Technically, if I could eliminate those errors I think I could consistently score -1 per section.

I've tried a bunch of things to eliminate these mistakes (e.g., doing untimed LR sections, BRing almost every question, slowing down on tough questions, skipping questions, even meditating to be in a clearer state of mind, etc.) but none of them have worked to consistently improve scores.

I was wondering how some of your were able to overcome a plateau in LR. What should I do? Any advice would be welcome, and thank you to anyone who responds!

Hey 7Sagers,

Here's the official March 2019 LSAT Discussion Thread.

**Please keep all discussions of the March 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:

Have fun discussing!

Hi I have taken LSAT twice so far..

First last November, I scored 163

This March I received 168..

I am hoping for another 5 point score improvement in my third and final LSAT score

I will apply to law schools this cycle

I am not studying LSAT right now because of uni and will resume when the semester is over in late June..

When do you recommend I take my next test?

Would September be too early/late?

Any advice would be appreciated.

Hello,

I am currently working full-time as a conflicts analyst at a well-known law firm and studying for the LSAT. I started my LSAT study last July and took the September exam. I scored horribly (138). I completely under-estimated the time and hard work it takes to really master the LSAT. After taking a 4 month break from studying, I began to study again in January of this year. I am currently scoring in the high 140's now and would like to get to the low 160's if possible. I signed up for the June test, anticipating that I would be ready, however, I, once again, under-estimated the time frame to study for the LSAT. I am now almost one month away from the June LSAT and I know I cannot improve 15+ points within 4-6 weeks, all while working full-time. Given this, I was considering taking the September LSAT, and I wanted to know if this seems like a good time frame? I am currently taking about 1-2 PT's a week and going over ways to improve on my LR/RC sections. I have improved on my LG's section (from -10 to -3). I have the hardest time with LR/RC.

All in all, I just want to know if the September test would be a good time for me to take the LSAT. I do not want to take the exam again, my gpa is decent, and I'm not stern on getting into a T14 school, I just want to make sure I get into a decent school with as much of an opportunity for scholarship.

Below is a sequential timer you can use for the RC Memory Method (3.5, 1.5, and 3.5 minutes). This way you know exactly when to move on to the next phase without changing the timer.

https://www.timeanddate.com/timer/

Studying for the LSAT is so brutal that when you hit a goal like this it is important to take a deep breath and appreciate the work you have put in thus far. My diagnostic was a 144 for some perspective here. For anyone that is currently struggling with LG - trust the process. Keep grinding and you will see the results.

Back to the books!

Hi there,

Is anyone down to study (seriously hammer out LSAT questions) in the Los Angeles area? I'm in the Cerritos area. I plan on taking the July exam.

Say you have premise that doesn't specifically identify whether members are in or out, but is a bi-conditional like:

"Wharton serves on a different committee than the one Zhu serves on"

How do you decide which side to negate? It ends up having consequences when you chain up and try to find "or" and "not both" inferences with other members. I'm so confused.

I'm trying to improve my LR, but I'm really struggling under timed conditions. What advise do you guys have to get -5 or less consistently?

I have a hard time understanding why B is the right answer? Also, could someone explain why D is wrong?

Does anyone have any strategies or tricks for these questions? The latter is heavily lawgic based, which helps at times, but I'm still getting more of them wrong than any other question type.

There are no video explanations for this PT ): I got this correct originally and then in BR changed my answer to E. Can anyone explain why C is correct? I can't seem to find the rationale I used last weekend to pick it.

Thanks in advance!

77.3. - Game 3 is a doozy! I was getting into a better groove with timed LG and then...this one. Holla if you hear me.

I got this hopelessly wrong. Only after some quite extensive reviewing, I was able to put the explanation together. Anyone who has done this problem before please review my reasoning and add to it.

#help

PP --> Money

D --> EqualPP

D --> PP --> Money

/money

/D

A - I didn't see any conjunctions in the stimulus

B -

Bookstore --> money

LoveBooks

BooksExpensive

---------------

/money

C -

Hist-Fic --> accuracy

Sci-Fic --> /accuracy

----------------

Hist-Scifi --> Difficult

D - Sometimes and difficult to predict, can eliminate this

E -

GoodHealth --> Exercise

Exercise --> AdequateTime

-------------------------------------

GoodHealth --> Exercise --> AdequateTime

/Adequatetime

------------------------------------

/Goodhealth

This parallels.

Hey could someone break this down for me? Thanks

Hi!

I am going through MBT and MSS questions because they seem to be my biggest weakness. I came across this question while drilling and I contended between (B) and (E). I ultimately chose (B) and again in BR.

I thought the "everyone sometimes acts in ways that are..." could be considered as "commonly performed actions", and thought (B) was regarding to those actions that occur as a result of treatment as infants and therefore, people are not morally responsible.

I understand why (E) is correct - within the scope of "everyone" includes adults, therefore adults are not responsible for every actions (because there could be those actions they perform as a consequence of treatments they received as infants) - but I can't exactly pinpoint why (B) is wrong.

It would be extremely helpful and greatly appreciated if someone could shed some light on this question!

Thank you :)

This has come up briefly before on the forums, but I wanted to ask more about chaining biconditionals rather than splitting. On PT 54 game 1, because I wasn't on point with my understanding of biconditionals, I tried to chain up the first two rules with the rest, and it ended up being a total mess. I was super confused, whereas when I came back to it and just split the board and got rid of the biconditional it was a lot easier.

I think there are times where chaining biconditionals is helpful, but my real question is, do we then have to write two versions of it when trying to read the chain? Because biconditionals can be /A (-) B or A (-) /B, (and the other two for "always together"), I find it pretty hard to read the chains. How do you guys go about this / is it ever really THAT helpful? It seems like if a biconditional comes up on an in-out game, it's always better to split it?

Also if you know of any games that use chaining biconditionals, that would be helpful!

I am having a hard time with newer RCs. With older ones (( PT60), I can often find a clearer correspondence between a correct answer and the supporting lines. With newer RC passages, the Answer choices really stumped me. There seems no correct answers! Because I cannot find A correct answer, I often struggle with one question for a long time and had to rush the rest of questions/passages.(/p)

Any tips?

A related question is that I see a couple of people mentioned fool-proof RCs. Fool-proofing method for LG worked really well for me, so I am thinking to try out this method for RC. Did it work for you, especially with newer RCs? Thanks.

Hello,

I am unable to understand lines 28-36.

I cannot understand what the author means by concentrating its resources on areas brought inadvertently within the scope. What does he mean by concentrating resources? Does he mean that he would enforce the law on those for whom it wasn't intended? Or does he mean that the agency would spend resources to avoid prosecuting innocent people who were inadvertently brought within the scope of the law?

I'm unsure if the author is saying that capricious enforcement seems unlikely or something else is unlikely.

Thank you so much.

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-68-section-1-passage-4-passage/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-68-section-1-passage-4-questions/

A will go to B except when C happens.

Maybe it can be done conditionally, I'm not sure. I've been thinking about writing C as a sufficient (either positive or negated), but I realized that except is saying something totally different then our typical conditional "lawgic." Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it's saying that when it's satisfied, the rule is irrelevant and when it's negated, nothing happens----the rule still stands while also not triggering anything. This is polar opposite of the way our conditionals are understood. So I was thinking it ought be represented in a special way.

J.Y. used the diagram method, but it doesn't really sit well with my style of understanding. I was wondering what others do.

Thanks!

Hi! So studying for July 15, finished the CC here and now drilling with the free Khan Academy materials (and to simulate digital testing), doing 1 PT/wk., but increasing to 2/wk at the 3 month mark, then at 1.5months out doing 3/wk.

PT scores are 167, 170, 175, 167, 166 for PTs 36-40, respectively.

I generally average -4 on LR (though this can be affected by if I'm mentally weariness/clarity), LG -4 (miscellaneous games kill me when they emerge), and RC -4.

Thoughts on how to move fwd? I want to clear 170 on test day, dreaming of NYU ED acceptance. UGPA 4.0 and in a MA program in the MENA region currently.

Pls help with any tips you have.

Is it ok to br rc right after pt?

I read that I should br within 24hrs, but it seems I'd remember stuff much more if I br right away.

What's better? br right after or do it after two days? It takes me whole day to br lr and lg, and by the end of it I get really tired. So it's either I br rc right after pt or do it two days after...