Discussions

LSAT

New post

208 posts in the last 30 days

I have some questions about this Q. Some of the information I'm presenting about this question I've only understood after reading forum boards (I don't have access to JYs explanation for this PT) but I still have a question.

Here is some background/how I see the argument:

P: Many people would agree that anyone who opposes higher taxes will make a better leader than someone who supports them.

P: Thompson opposes higher taxes, his opponents support higher taxes

C: Of the ppl running, Thompson will be the best person to lead the nation

So the flaw is an opinion vs. reality flaw; the author presents a view that some people hold and then makes his conclusion based on that opinion.

Therefore the assumption is that either 1) "many people would agree"... these "many people" actually hold the truth which leads me to assumption 2) there is a positive correlation between opposing taxes and being a good leader.

The answer choices I was stuck between:

A) Opposing high taxes isn't a factor contributing to good leadership

b) Being opposed to high taxes isn't sufficient for good leadership

My question:

  • Is the first premise of the argument a comparative statement or a conditional statement?

    • At first this is how I read it:

    Many people would agree [[that anyone who opposes higher taxes will make a better leader than someone who supports them.]]

    Conditional: oppose high taxes --> better leader [[subscript - many ppl think this]]

    The argument goes on to "satisfy sufficient" and then concludes the necessary condition

    But it clearly also reads like a comparative

    Many people would agree that anyone who opposes higher taxes will make a better leader than someone who supports them.

    So between ppl opposing high taxes vs ppl supporting high taxes, ppl opposing "win" the better leader award lol ...

    The confusion I have above (parsing out that statement) is why I have so much trouble still understanding the relationship between the two answer choices. Can someone explain to me, based on the confusion I have above, why A is right and B is wrong. Also, when a comparative also reads like a conditional what do you do??

    Thank you, I hope that all made sense! Let me know if you need me to clarify... I'm very in and out with my understanding of this question and would love some help (3(/p)

    https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-80-section-1-question-19/

    Admin note: added link

    0

    I just watched a LG explanation video for a game that JY described as being hard and taking around 12 minutes. It was the first logic game. I am not proficient with logic games yet and under timed pressure I know I would spend the whole 35 minutes on a difficult game. I would like to do easier games first and then come back to a harder game. Any thoughts on how to recognize what increases the difficulty of a game. I know it's not an ideal strategy. I don't want to have to skip a game at all, but if it comes down to it, I would rather get 3 simpler games done right rather than waste too much time on a hard game up front. Thanks for your thoughts.

    0

    Hey all,

    I've noticed a trend where I feel that almost all answer choices with the word "many" or "some" are WRONG in weaken questions. I think the general reason for this is that because "many/some" can mean as little as 1, it's very hard to weaken an argument with just one instance of something.

    Can anyone confirm this trend for me, or have any thoughts/comments/advice? Does anyone also have an example where this is not the case -- where an answer choice with the word "some/many" is actually the right answer choice for a weaken question?

    Also, I'm curious to hear your thoughts for RC weaken questions. Does this trend also hold true?

    Thank you!

    0

    So I'm new to LG -- I've already done the first section regarding sequencing games, and I've foolproofed all 10 problem sets from that first section. I feel like I've got that down; then I moved onto to sequencing games w/ a twist (and double sequencing games) and whenever I come across a new game for the first time in the problem set, it takes me longer than it should (usually 3-5 mins) to get the game board set up, and then takes me a while to solve it.

    I understand that through practicing and foolproofing that I can finish the game correctly in the target time it should take, however, I'm just getting really discouraged because I feel like I have to keep watching the video explanation for EVERY single game just to get it down.

    I feel like at some point I should start to be able to solve these games on my own without needing to watch the video explanations.

    When did you guys get to the point that you could come across a new game and solve it efficiently? I know I'm just starting out, but it's just tough when it keeps taking me longer than it should to get the games solved. Any success stories?

    0

    Hello 7sagers.

    So wondering if I should be approaching these 5 star questions differently. I recently took a PT where I missed 5 LR questions and all of them were 5 star questions, (Weaken, Strengthen, Parallel, Flaw, AP) so, I decided to start by drilling some of the 5 star strengthen questions and I got like 10 wrong in a row.

    What should be my strategy going forward here? Go back to the CC?

    Is there something you think specificially about 5 star questions that help you get them better?

    Or should I not even be focusing on the difficulty of the questions and just focus on the type of questions I'm having difficulty with.

    Thanks

    1

    Just recently started the curriculum and planning on taking LSAT next year January latest March was wondering if anyone has same test date goals and wanted to coordinate some study sessions together.

    3

    I just finished PT 47 and got -10 in section 3, LR. -3 on the other LR section. Having study for LSAT for a year.

    It is simply so discouraging that I still get -10 in an LR section after studying for a year and ton of drill. Especially that LR is the section that I spent most of my energy on, because it has 2 sections in the exam and it is almost impossible for me to get 170+ with -3/-4 per section. (-0 in LG but not strong in RC)

    -10 is not normal performance for me. Most common performance for me is around -4/-5/ per section. But, in a set of PT, I often have a good LR section (~-3) and a bad one (~-8). Sometimes I do pretty well when I thought I was not in good mood (e.g. feeling sleepy at night), and sometimes I do pretty bad when I thought I was in good shape. I don't quite understand what my performance is telling.

    For timing, I finish a 26-qiestion LR section for 30-35min (yes my speed also fluctuate). I always try to apply "low-hang coconut" rule, but I never finished quick enough to have a full 2nd round, and I still feel stressed on the 2nd round. Plus, most of my errors hide in the questions that I did not circled.

    For the questions I got wrong, I can recognize the error of 90%+ of them pretty quick and without watching explain videos. I think the problem is not that my logic is weak, but my mindset/approach to the questions is problematic. As to question type, I do worse in argument-type questions, and better in RRE/Disagree/labeling questions.

    I think I am on a changing in my understanding of argument-type questions. I used to seriously read every single word in the questions stimulus, try to understand the topic. But a week ago I start to realize that what really matter is the relationship between P & C. It's all about logic reasoning structure. But I haven't convert this understanding into a test strategy. Should I go on PTs or should I do some drill? (for the question from PT 40 or earlier, I am so familiar with them that I almost remember them...) Would love to hear some advices from somebody that have gone though the process.

    Thanks a lot in advance!! :)

    1

    Can any grammar geeks out there please explain how the sentence structure of answer choice B works? How do I know that "that species" is referring to the bacterial species and not to the antibiotic species? I understand that species inherently means something alive and perhaps I am being naive in assuming antibiotics can mean alive as it's name implies death of living things. However, on a purely grammatical level, the subject of the sentence is seemingly the antibiotics so anything coming after a comma that comes after the introduction to the subject should thus be talking about the subject. Am I off about this?

    https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-62-section-4-question-11/

    Admin note: link added

    0

    Hi all!

    In the phrase "It is the national government that must save the environment"

    Why is it that "save the environment" is not the necessary condition?

    and rather

    "save the environment -> national government" is the correct logical translation to this sentence ??

    Intuitively I can understand why,

    but it would help greatly to hear a clear explanation of the usage of "must" in this sentence

    Thanks in advance!

    0

    Hey all,

    so i hear of ppl who for RC comparative passage, they first scan the answers and see if there are specific questions that relate only to ONE passage. they then read that ONE passage, and then do the questions for that passage also.

    Then, they read the second passage and finish the rest of the questions.

    Question: what is your strategy for RC comparative? Do you read both passages back to back? or do you first glance at the questions, see if there are any questions that only address one passage (sometimes i know all the questions address both passages), and then just read one passage first and then do the questions?

    Thanks.

    0

    Hi Everyone,

    Currently, I'm completing the full 7Sage course. I am now on the logic "lawgic" portion of the lesson. When I look at my study schedule/syllabus, however, I see that practice tests are not on there until I have completed everything else. Is this correct? Should I add in some practice tests between some lessons or at least sections (LR, LG, RC)? I feel like I will lose everything I learned if I wait to actually apply it. What are your thoughts? Thanks!

    0

    do you guys watch all of JY's LG videos for every single logic game you do? Even for LG's that you got right under the estimated amount of time? Would love to hear any thoughts/advice/pros/cons. thanks so much.

    0

    In this strengthening question, the conclusion that most universities offer a cosmopolitan and in depth education is supported by the premise that most universities have history departments utilizing more culturally diverse and complete textbooks. The correct answer essentially says that the cultural inclusivity of a university’s history textbook is a strong indication of how in depth and cosmopolitan that university’s education is.

    My question is how do we know that this strengthens the argument? After all, it is possible that this could mean that universities with more culturally inclusive textbooks have a less in depth and cosmopolitan education. The correct answer only tells as that there is a correlation, but it does not say what direction that correlation goes in. Thanks in advance for the help.

    Admin note: edited title

    https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-60-section-1-question-11/

    0

    On 7Sage and other blogs/podcasts, I have been hearing a ton of people getting nervous about the July test date due to the fact that it is non-disclosed AND a brand new "experimental" test date. It seems many people are fearful that this will somehow make the test slightly different or more challenging than the other test dates.

    I beg everyone to please remember: THE LSAT AND LSAC ARE DESIGNED FOR UNIFORMITY. If LSAC were to put out an official test that was somehow different than any of the others, or is expected to possibly wield different results, then LSAC would be failing as an institution.

    It is LSAC's primary job to be a reliable source for law schools vetting students. If law schools believe that the students they are vetting had taken incomparable tests, then that vetting process would be completely ruined.

    Sincerely,

    I'm Losing My Mind

    Admin note: edited title (Sorry, no all caps!)

    1

    Hey all,

    I've been going through lots of RC passages lately and I'm noticing that I do significantly worse on passages that discuss my field of study. I tend to get absorbed in the details and miss a lot of the big picture questions. I usually go about -1 on most passages but on these passages I perform wayyy worse. Anyone else have similar experiences, or any suggestions?

    0

    I've heard that I may be better served using PowerScore Bible for RC than I would 7sage, is this true? Anyone have any experience with both? I'm not saying that what I have heard is true, and I'm certainly not looking to instigate any bias-related arguments, just looking for candor and a way to maximize my efficiency in terms of studying with regards to time-management and available resources. Thank you!

    1

    I'm looking at the question stimulus and one of the wrong answers and wondering if these two mean exactly the same thing:

    "Not all skilled artists are famous"

    "Some skilled artists are not famous"

    And if so.. could someone kindly explain the logic behind it?

    Here are my thoughts so far:

    I understand that Not all ranges from (0-99)

    and that Some (1-100) but since it is Some..not (subtracting from 100 range, (100-100), (100-1) --> (0,99)?)

    so.. number wise.. they seem to indicate the exact same range?

    0

    Hey all,

    I know for many question stems, especially flaw Q's, the answer choices begins with "takes for granted."

    For these type of answer choices, can we apply the negation test and see if it destroys the argument? The question type is not a strict "Necessary Assumption" question, but the answer choices are phrased as "Takes for granted"/assumptions, so can we treat them as similar to how we treat a necessary assumption answer choice -- and negate them?

    Thanks.

    0

    Hi all,

    I recently jumped from doing PTs in the 40s to PTs in the 70s in preparation of the June exam. What I've noticed is that the LR sections in the 70s seem to contain a lot more 'odd-ball' argument forms. Because I've never encountered these argument forms before, it seems the only way I can get these correct is through P.O.E., and this is too unreliable for my tastes. Has anyone compiled a list of these argument forms?

    I'll offer a few examples to illustrate what I'm talking about. Potential Spoilers below for PTs in the 70s

    PT76 S2 Q13 - This MBT question has no inferences to be made, the correct AC is just a restatement of the stimulus. Weird!

    PT76 S2 Q18 - This is a NA question in an argument-by-analogy form.. again.. really weird!

    PT76 S2 Q22 - Really bizarre SA question that uses a 'tautology' argument form.

    PT76 S2 Q24 - Another NA question with a weird "A-->absurd" argument form.

    That's 4 really bizarre question in a single section! Am I crazy for thinking that 70s LR is really quite different from LR in the 40s?

    Any help for these weird argument forms would be so dearly appreciated, lol.

    1

    Confirm action

    Are you sure?