Does anyone have any advice for approaching “attitude” questions? They often seem highly subjective and trip me up, while other have clear right or wrong answers.

Ex: June 1997 - RC Q. 13

Which of the following most accurately describes the author’s attitude toward proposals to introduce personal stories into legal discourse?

A. Strongly Opposed

B. Somewhat Skeptical

C. Ambivalent

D. Strongly supportive

E. Unreservedly optimistic

While a - c were obviously false since the narrative spoke positively about personal stories in legal discourse, how do I distinguish between D and E?

I chose E because the author stated “narrative might play a crucial, positive role...” (a very optimistic statement) but never directly comes out in support of a proposal to make the change. Tips are appreciated!

What do people think the odds are that the LSAT writers put a weird, old-school logic game on the test this Saturday? Something in the vein of a mapping or pattern type game. I'm gonna go out on a limb and say one shows up though, of course, I hope to be wrong.

Does "Many" = "Some" or "More than one" ?

7sage says "many" = "some." Thus, "many" can include "one."

But other resources have said "many" means 2 or more. Thus, "many" would NOT include "one."

So does "many" include one or not?

I think this is important because for PT 76.4.12, (I think that) whether answer choice A is right or wrong depends on what definition of "many" you have.

IF we assume that "many" includes "one," and that the negation of "many" is "none," then the way LSAC uses "many" in answer choice A of PT 76.4.12 is INCONSISTENT. In this context, it assumes "many" is "two or more." This is HUGE, because if you assume "many" equals "one," it changes Answer choice A from a WRONG answer choice to a RIGHT answer choice.

So LSAC seems to be inconsistent with how it uses "many."

Any suggestions or advice appreciated. thank you.

I've been going through MP questions to make sure that I am able to flesh out the main point/conclusion of different texts. I remember at some point JY says that often for harder questions, the LSAT's will try to trick you by throwing in a "Thus," or some indicator word around those lines at the end of a paragraph to throw you off. But, I've found recently that I've gotten a couple of questions wrong because when it came to the wire I choose the choice that was not the final sentence, but turned out to be the final sentence. For example I'm currently on LSAT 44 - Section 2 - Question 16, and was tricked because I ignored the "Hence," at the end. While I read the comments and understand the explanations for why B (what I choose) was wrong and E (the correct answer) was right, I was wondering if anyone has some general advice/steps to take when looking at a stimulus to figure out whether a last sentence with a conclusion indicator is right or wrong.

I'm having trouble figuring out why A is a wrong answer choice.

If we apply the negation test to AC A, it will say -- "All of the scents that have a tendency to reduce susceptibility to illness do NOT do so by reducing stress."

Wouldn't "All of the scents" also include lavender, meaning lavender does not reduce susceptibility to illness by reducing stress? Wouldn't this wreck the argument?

Any advice or suggestions appreciated. Thank you.

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-76-section-4-question-12/

#help

Question 10: How do we know that "additives" was ever the cause of behavioral problems in the first place? Researchers being "trained to assess the presence or absence of behavioral problems" does not mean whatever behavioral problems are there are caused by additives. I feel like the question omits declaring the cause of the behavioral problems is in-facts additives. Grrrrr.

Admin note: edited title

Can someone explain to me how answer B is the correct one? The sentence the question is asking concerns how cooking has impacted biological evolution; B is about domesticated animals and has nothing to do with cooking?

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-84-section-1-passage-4-passage/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-84-section-1-passage-4-questions/

Hi there!

So I'm still trying to answer this question and could use some help! Lots of different sources, including 7sager and the Trainer, suggest I find the flaw in the argument if I can, before considering answer choices. The question I've never been able to answer is this: Why? What does a correct answer choice in an NA question do to that flaw? With SA questions, the correct answer choice makes the flaw disappear. But with an NA, I don't have an answer. Any help would be amazing! I'm taking the Jan Lsat next week and I'm trying to tie up loose ends.

So I've done many logical games and fool proofed them by watching the explanation videos. Everything gets so much easier when doing it the second time after watching how it's done. I overall understand a majority of logical games, however, I am still struggling with finishing all of them on time. I end up spending 8-9 minutes on average on each game, so I can never get around completing all four games.

Any last minute suggestions that could help me improve on this section for next week?

I did the November lsat and got -5 on the LG section. I'm looking to improve my score by 4-5 points, so an increase in this section will definitely help.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-57-section-2-question-15/

The answer to this question is A. I understand why the other answer choices are wrong, but I have a hard time accepting A because David literally concedes Carla's premises... I don't think he can then be considered to be ignoring any part of her answer. That doesn't make any sense to me. If someone can help me out, I'd appreciate it!

Admin note: edited title

Does anyone have any tips for MSS?

Everything I've read through just doesn't seem to click and I keep getting these type of questions wrong :( I'm aware that they are similar to MBT but with a lower degree of certainty needed.

Ok, so I just got done doing the CC on MBT questions and had a few questions...

The AC can be derived from any conditional from within the stimulus, correct?

Would it be wise to ignore any signs of argumentation in these and strictly diagram them?

Is conditional logic alone sufficient for solving all of these problems?

I think the games below are beneficial for those finding themselves making "silly" mistakes when reading split game boards. Those mistakes are probably less "silly" and more indicative of a mechanical/procedural weakness you have - actually that was just the case for me. I don't want to paint with a broad stroke. Either way, I thought these were good games to do in a fool-proof kind of way to get splitting quickly and accurately down pat.

I'm having a hard time understanding why answer choice D) in Question 13 is wrong even though I have watched the video multiple times already. I was left with C) and D) timed.

Initially I thought "large geographical areas" in D) was fine b/c of line 18 to 20. But is it wrong because centers of style are dispersed OVER large areas as opposed to being large areas themselves?

Also the passage says the characteristics patterns are subtly different that few people outside of the area can distinguish Nuna masks from Ko masks around line 45. But D) says they are VERY DIFFICULT for outside observers to distinguish. Just because few can distinguish, doesn't mean it is VERY difficult for others. Had it said "not easy for others," would it have been better?

--Is this line of thinking acceptable...?

The question asks what the word "succession" in line 57 refers to. I read back over the part and thought that it referred to the action of "clearing followed by regular burning" and picked A. However it is C and I don't really understand why?

Admin note: edited title

Hey fam,

So I've been going over logic games, realizing that I've been having trouble doing new grouping games/grouping games I've never seen under timed conditions (as in, under the 7sage suggested time). This post is one part general advice request (please help, I honestly don't know what I'm doing wrong, and I haven't picked up on anything in my recordings aside from the fact that I'm not making inferences quickly enough), one part specific advice request.

Specific questions: I've been taking note of not both rules with logic. It's a hold over from in/out games and I also find it helpful for some games (Like PT18 game 1). But then there are other games (like PT26 game 3) that I am sure would be easier if I noted the many not both laws as blocks. My questions is, how do I choose between the two? Rule of thumb says, choose one and be consistent, right? Part of me is tempted to just go with whatever works. But in that case, how do I know which notation to pick when I'm setting up the game?

I know that some people are thinking, "just keep drilling, you'll figure it out." But I could really use some help seeing some patterns.

Please and thank you

These questions consistently take me three minutes to do when they're in the 4 or 5 stars difficulty. Takes me a minute to read and diagram the stimulus and then another two to read or diagram the answer choices, and I still get them wrong sometimes because of rushing. Do you guys have any advice on how you tackle these questions quickly? Thanks =)

Please offer your help with this question! Apologies for a long post.

We know that snowy land reflects MORE sunlight.

That means snowy land absorbs LESS sunlight. We dont know what effect this ABSORPTION has on earths overall temperature (although I think it is logically implied that absorbing light means absorbing heat so C doesnt add anything new!)

C) explains what the effect of absorbing sunlight has on overall temperature of the earth. Absorbing heat actually warms up the atmosphere.

So when the earth gets more snowy lands+iced ocean surface, which means there will be more sunlight reflected and less sunlight absorbed, the earth temperature will likely decline.

Again, I don't see how C strengthens because I thought more reflection logically implies less absorption. And less absorption means less heat absorbed. So C isnt saying anything new… Of course absorbed heat would warm up the atmosphere?!

Could someone also explain D? It is very tough to eliminate it.

I chose D) because it seemed to work as a defender Strengthener. There may be other factors such as volcanic eruptions that override the temperature change brought by having more snowy surfaces. If that is the case, and the sunlight absorbed plays a minority role in determining the overall temperature of the earth's atmosphere, the conclusion would be weakened. D effectively blocks this possibility by saying that the atmosphere derives most of its heat from sunlight.

Thank you!!

Hi everyone. I have always thought NA questions are like inference questions in that their right answer will be true if the conclusion is true. And I thought the SA question types are the ones that the correct answer will bridge the broken conditional chains.

But over and over, from JY and others, I hear the comment that goes 'answer choice X is correct because it fills the gap between the premise and the conclusion" in the NA question expls..

Okay. So I guess that NA are sort of like SA, but NA right answers are minimum requirement while SA right answers are 100% air tight reason?

I have always thought NA are similar to inference. But now I'm just confused.... Is there a simple way to clearly distinguish NA from SA? HELP!

Hello,

I just registered for the June LSAT and below is the notice that was at the top:

"Notice starting with June 2019 LSAT: The writing section will be separate from the LSAT starting with the June 3, 2019 test. This change will result in greater convenience and flexibility for test takers as the testing date will be shorter, the essay will be typed rather than handwritten, and it can be completed at a time and place of the test takers' choosing. By registering for the June LSAT, candidates will be automatically eligible to complete the writing section as of the date of the LSAT and up to one year thereafter. Candidates are only required to have one essay on file to complete their Law School Reports. Essays completed during previous LSAT administrations will still be valid for use in Law School Reports. There will be an additional fee of $15 for each administration of LSAT Writing."

This may have already been discussed, but I haven't seen anything about it. We don't focus much on the writing sample, but I've heard it's actually important to top law schools who are choosing between two high-scoring candidates. In regards to the notice, does this mean we have to register for another day? I'm only like 20% through the LSAT Course so I know very little about the writing sample but I'm curious how exactly this new form of the writing sample is different than before?

Thanks!

Hi!

I recently started doing the "Fool Proof Guide to Perfection on Logic Games"

For a game where the ideal time according to 7Sage is 6 minutes. I am scoring under that when fool proofing the game.

1st attempt: 8:50 (same day)

2nd attempt: 6:51 (same day)

3rd attempt: 5:47 (same day)

4th attempt: 4:42 (next day)

I guess I should come back to this game in a couple days or next week and see if my time is still roughly 4 minutes?

Is it redundant for me to keep drilling this game since I'm already under the allocated time?

Hi guys which strategy do you think is better? Going for accuracy or covering the entire questions?

I try to go for the "low-hanging coconut" during the timed tests but i find that it's hard b/c unlike LR, LG section takes 2 to 3 minutes just to figure out the rules and the diagram. And sometimes I find it a bit distracting (and makes my answers even less accurate) to move back and forth between questions in LG just to cover all the questions.

How do you guys deal with this problem? I wanna hear ur thoughts

I keep hearing that RC is the hardest to improve on, and since I have about 18 months until my first attempt I'd like to solidify RC. On my June 07 timed diagnostic I scored a 152 with a -7 in RC. Does this constitute a good score? And what exactly can I do to get down to -1/0? I've always been a fast reader and finished all the passages and questions with 2 minutes left. The 7 I missed were all seemingly dumb mistakes.

How do you guys like the memory method? I haven't looked at it yet as I'm focused on LR right now.

I'm sure I'm not alone in this, but RC is by far my worst section. I'd say I've greatly improved on LG and LR and have a pretty good understanding of the concepts on both sections, but for some reason RC is just not clicking with me. My best score on RC was -10 and worst was -17. My BR scores for RC range from -5 to -10. My goal score is 170 because I don't have the best GPA to get me accepted into my dream school and I plan on taking the June test (I've been studying since August and began PT's in November) and I'm really aiming for -0 to -3 but I have no idea where to begin. Is it possible to achieve -0 by June? Any advice would be greatly appreciated! :)

Hello Everyone!

Im facing a dilemma. So I have applied to schools and hoped that the November LSAT would have been my final exam. It didn’t work out that way and I am unable to take the January test. The March is LSAT is my only option, I’m not necessarily taking it for admission, I am retaking it for scholarship reconsideration. Do you guys think this is too late in the cycle? I’ve noticed many schools are requiring that the deposit be made prior to the current April 19th score relseae date. Any advice is appreciated!

(I am unable to take it and apply next cycle - next cycle is not an option for multiple reasons)

Thanks!