Hello everyone,

For those that have had reasonably good results on their PT’s, I’d like to know how you go about annotating each question stem/prompt. No matter the stem in LR, do you always identify the premises, minor-conclusions and major conclusions with its supporting evidence?

I have problems identifying if some prompts contain only premises or context sentences, like type-2 MC question stems.

Maybe I don’t have the muscle memory to quickly figure out if something from 4 sentences ago supports a sentence I am currently reading. Any insight into this topic will definitely help me!

Hello everyone.

Can someone explain to me why the answer that is most strongly supported is E?

I even watched the video and it totally seems like an assumption. In no way does the prompt lead one to believe that artificial fibers are straight in their original state, even if shirts made with artificial fibers do not shrink under hot water.

So I do not see how one could infer that since the process of straightening or shrinking does not happen to polyester, that it was naturally straight. It could be the case that Polyester isn't naturally straight, but that it also does not shrink under hot water.

Any help would be greatly appreciated

Hi all,

i took the June 2024 LSAT and got the EXACT SAME score as my previous January one, a 157. I was REALLY hoping for a 165+ and feel so discouraged and upset. My UGPA was only a 3.81 so it's also not optimal. I'm now debating a third and final test, but I don't know how that will look on applications. I don't have fellowships or anything, but I do have a gap year full of amazing experiences. I think some law schools only take the highest score, some average, but do they see how many times I had to take it? I don't want to hurt my chances any more than I already have. any advice is strongly appreciated. I'm truly so lost and upset I can't stop crying.

Can someone explain why D is the correct answer and not A? I feel like the passage suggests that kinglets do not participate in nocturnal behavior to find food.

Can someone explain this? It says "most anthropologists" agreed with Darwin. I may just be blind but I can't seem to find where it says or even suggests that "most" anthropologists. It does suggest that Darwin's theory was the preexisting accepted theory but that doesn't necessarily mean the "most"

The last time I took the lsat, it was when it was paper/pencil and in person. For the new online and at home lsats, can you have scratch paper with you?

I'm a relatively high-scoring pretest taker (average score 174.7 on my 10 most recent preptests), but it feels like I sometimes struggle with basic structure questions. Case in point, for PT 105 S3 Q4 I selected answer choice A, rather than the correct answer E. After going back and reviewing the question, I can see how E would make sense, but in the moment I seem to find such questions difficult. This seems to carry over to other basic structure questions (such as PT108, S1, Q4). Does anyone have any tips on avoiding structural question pitfalls?

Take a minute to answer this question in the poll before continuing. This question is EVIL!!!! It may not seem so at first, but allow me to unpack the various tricks they use to make a rather simple question very tricky.

I initially picked A, and ill explain my reasoning behind it. I read first that this is an inferrence statement, so immediately my mind is looking to fill in a logical hole. As I scan through the passage, my mind comes to this, "Why is it necessary to not build an incinerator to prevent waste? What if the incinerator is not used? What about other methods of disposal?" Then I see answer A, "All of the city's trash that is not recycled goes into the incinerators." This feels great! This fills in a hole in my mind about the waste, and clearly makes this argument complete. Trash either is recycled or put in the incinerator, so lets not build an incinerator. This is a great answer for a support/strengthen question, and it feeeeeels like it completes the logic of the argument. However, this one is wrong! Not only does it retread the ground of what happens to recycling when an incinerator is rebuilt(making this statement unnecessary), no where does the argument support this!!!! DON'T FORGET THE QUESTION STEM!!! We are looking for something we could logically conclude from the passage above, not looking to fix the passage in any way. Once you remember that, the question is obviously wrong.

The other dangerous thing about this question is that the answer, D, looks awful. It uses very, very strong language of CANNOT and ANY. It uses the exact same language of the passage, which usually indicates a wrong answer. It elaborates on only one premise, instead of the whole passage, and it ignores the conclusion. Terrible!!! However, if you read it carefully, its pretty easy to prove. If the city is to avoid(avoid is a rather low bar) wasting resources, huge amounts of trash cannot be burned in any city incinerator. Looking at the rest of the passage, this is clear from the burn = waste. Some burning = some waste, so to avoid waste we avoid burning. Simple!

This one is correct, but it takes dodging a lot of traps to get to it. Be careful! The LSAT creators are clever and will lay many traps to stop you!

Admin Note: Removed PT questions. Please do not post the entire question and answer choices for the LSAC question. This is copyrighted content and is against the Forum Rules.

Having a hard time understanding why A is wrong. The action was intended to cause harm thus necessitating it to be morally bad….right?

I know I’m wrong. I just need to know why.

#help

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question"

Just as the title says, I was wondering if anyone has any tips in regards to noting what you would categorize as context and what you would categorize as premise. I feel like there is a blurred line from my understanding.

Can someone explain this to me? This is a pfmr question but the answer looks like a contrapositive based on JY's explanation. For some reason I can't seem to understand why this is flawed and the comments don't have any additional help. Thanks.

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-74-section-4-question-25/

Could someone explain to me why answer E is not correct? I am having trouble understanding why, thanks y'all!

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

I started 7 sage core curriculum may 15th and i have only completed one module. I study every day but it takes me a long time to even compelete a lesson! My test is August 9th. Any suggestions anyone?? How are you guys finishing the modules in time I am getting stressed out relying on 7 sage.

If anyone's got one they no longer need please get in touch! It looks like it's sold out online (links welcome if I'm wrong).

Hey 7Sagers,

Here's the official June 2024 LSAT Discussion Thread.

REMINDER: Under your Candidate Agreement, you may not discuss the details of any specific LSAT questions at any time. For the June 2024 LSAT, general discussion of what sections you had, or how difficult you found a given section, or speculation about which sections were scored or unscored, is prohibited until after 9pm ET, Tuesday, June 11th.

Posts that violate these rules will be taken down and may result in disciplinary action from LSAC. Let’s work together to ensure the test is fair to everyone, and not share information before everyone has taken the test.

Some examples of typical comments:

✅ The following comments are okay 🙆‍♀️

❌ The following comments are over the line 🙅‍♂️

Good luck to everyone taking the June 2024 LSAT!

**Please keep all discussions of the June 2024 LSAT here!**(/red)

I'm scheduled to take my first test in August and am about 7 points away from my ideal score. My RC is pretty strong and I'm confident that won't weigh me down. But LR is a bit tricky for me, specifically the 4/5 difficulty questions. Obviously that makes sense, they're supposed to be the hardest ones. But I need to start getting more of them right if I want to break through to my target score. Any advice on how to get better at those LR questions?

I just want to confirm my understanding on this.

Are these true?

If sufficient fails then no valid conclusions about the necessary condition, but if sufficient satisfied or affirmed then it triggers necessary, hence we can have a valid conclusion.

If necessary fails then it would trigger the sufficient, hence we can have a valid conclusion, but if necessary satisfied or affirmed then no valid conclusion.

and also whats the best way to memorize this? lol

Can someone explain to me the difference between those two flaw types?

I find the way 7sage goes through the reading comp passages soooo useful. Although I have one problem and do not really know how to navigate it. If I take my time when going through the RC passages and review it the way I learn in the videos, I find myself taking 30 minutes to do 2 passages...and that's just not good.

How do you guys condense your time reviewing the passages, while using JY's method?

I keep choosing the second best answer, and then watch the explanation videos and understand why the answer I chose was wrong, but yet I keep doing it. Any advice on this?

I plan to take the August 2024 test without the Logic Games, is there any way to take all Games-related info out of my 7 sage to reduce clutter? Thanks

Why is the answer "B" instead of "A?"

Some historians believe that "the decline in wheat production was due to:"

1 Excessive irrigation

2 Lack of drainage

1 and #2 together lead to salt accumulation, problem #3

The way I understand it is that wheat production requires too much water, there isn't enough drainage, and salt builds up as a result of these two problems.

So with answer choice A, if barley requires less water than wheat, then does that strengthen the belief that they solved the too much water to produce problem (#1), the lack of drainage problem since less water needs to be drained (#2), and consequently salt accumulation is not a problem because the two problems causing it no longer are in the picture?

B, on the other hand, just accounts for salt buildup, but that is only a part of the problem because even if salt buildup doesn't matter anymore, we never accounted for too much water or the lack of irrigation.

Hopefully that makes sense and I appreciate any help.

I am wondering if the questions on the 7sage Drills are taken from LSAC directly? or are they written by 7sage

Just took the june exam-6th. LR was so weird but not hard-if you memorize a bunch of ways on how to do it you fail very abstract. LG - they kind of gave up on it almost like a joke, the first RC so boring in addition to those Russian names , should be illegal to include literature in comparative passages, the second one was a cake walk-pt 19 vibes. what happened to good stuff like formal logic, necessary assumptions....there no telling on this one.

I am registered to take the June 7 LSAT test, my first ever attempt. I have finished almost all of the circulum and took my first PT since by diagnostic which was 138 :(, I got the same mark on the PT but with blind review I got up to 157. Happy with the BR progess but does anyone have any tips on how I can translate this progress? I am aiming for eventually a 165 but also planning to take it again in August without the LG. Any tips or reccomendations are appreicated.