Can anyone please tell me how the answer choice (B) is correct and (C) is wrong?? I just can't get myself to understand. This just sounds like the question is playing word games.

Admin note: edited title

Can someone pls explain how, after reading the setup, you would know this should be set up as a chart vs a double layer sequencing setup?? Thanks

Hi,

I have been doing untimed reading comprehension drill. I am still getting -12 wrong on the section.

Any tips on improving and how to drill properly for reading comprehension?

These questions always trip me up. Sometimes, the LSAT is asking for exact definitions and sometimes, as in this case, they are asking for context. I've been studying the stimuli to come up with a system of when they want which one. In this case, I chose E as that is the closest definition to initiatory. I believe the words "intended meaning" are the key here in that they mean context and not definition. Thoughts?

I'm thinking that the trick is to ask yourself "What perspective is used in the question? Are they asking for the WORD's meaning (ie. Definition) or for the AUTHOR's purpose/intended meaning (ie. Context)?"

Admin note: edited title for formatting

When I do my problem set, do I need check explanation for every question even if I got it right?

I truly don't understand how the answer for this question is (a) and not (c). I literally spent an hour trying to come up with reasons as to why that could be but still can't seem to find an answer. Can someone please help? How is there an analogy being made here?

Admin note: edited title for formatting

Is 16 weeks enough time to boost my score? I really froze on the last one. This would theoretically be my last chance. I was getting 170s on practice tests but ended up with a 155 on the actual test. Awful. Thoughts? I could also wait and take it in September. I just don't know how good that long of a study period would do for me. Also...I fear that I have taken all of the practice tests.

Worth noting that I have yet to use 7Sage. I used another prep company before. It honestly was helpful (like I said, I was super pleased with my practice tests), but I would love to really sharpen my skills and crush all of the logic games with 7Sage.

Help!

Sometimes in flaw questions, I realize that the flaw is an incorrect negation (e.g. a --> b, ~a-->~b), however the answer choice will not explicitly say "incorrect negation"

Is one regular way of describing the conditional flaw of "incorrect negation" that "the argument assumes that the only way to get to 'b' is 'a'" or "fails to see that a is not the only condition to get to 'b'?"

I'm trying to see if i properly understand PT 49 - s4 #23

Admin note: edited title

I'm having serious trouble with weaken questions. I am only averaging about 1/2 correct. Could anyone help?

What is your plan of attack for weaken questions?

I'd love to hear some opinions.

Hi all,

I am having issues with my speed while going through Reading Comprehension with roughly 5 mins remaining typically going into the last passage. Does anyone have any tips or tricks that could be of use?

Hey guys! I'm sure most of you, like me, get excited whenever JY says that a question is a curve breaker question and you happened to get it right. I know the question bank has questions organized by most difficult. But I was wondering if any of you have a few specific questions that have been deemed "curve breaker." I'm asking because I'd like to gather them all and hone in on them haha. These are the questions that stump even the highest scorers. I have horrible recollection of past specific preptests and which questions were hard but of course every test has them. So far I only have a couple specific ones in mind:

If you know any specifics, please comment! :)

So I'm going -2 to -6 per section on LR.

I am missing a wide range of questions it's not just a specific question type. Does anyone have some advice or what has helped them for prepping?

I'm using all the time allotted.

BR'ing to -1 or -2.

What have you guys done to get LR down to -0?

Hey all,

(heads up: many words in this remark, but thanks so much in advance for reading and taking the time to help! i really appreciate it and am very grateful for everyone's thoughtful advice/comments :] )

I started LR usually around -14 total. After about 2 months of doing solely LR (I've also already spent 2 months doing LG), I've gotten LR down to around -8/-7 consistently (this score is after blind review. i usually correctly fix around 4 total Q's during BR, so prior to BR, my total LR misses would be like -11). After BR, my misses are about -4 on each LR sections (if I'm lucky I'll get a -3/-2).

When I do LR sections timed, I try to have a skipping strategy but I end up leaving 1 or 2 Q's (that are hard and I skipped) blank when time ends.

When I'm doing the LR section, I try to go 15 in 15 minutes, and then work from there. I can usually get 10 for 10 minutes, but then as I hit questions like #15-25, I find myself slowing down. I'll finish the section with like 4 minutes extra, but there will be 2-3 questions I completely skipped, and 3 circled questions that I was really unsure of. With those extra 4 minutes, I can usually finish only 1 or 2 of those questions I completely skipped, and then don't have enough time to check other questions I wasn't sure about. Sometimes I run out of time before I can get to 1 question I skipped.

I've gone through CC. I've also read LSAT trainer and Powerscore LR bible, but I think CC was much better and more thorough.

My LR misses have been pretty scattered, but I see that some of my weak spots are flaw, weaken, strengthen. With weaken/strengthen questions, I think one of my weaknesses is causation/correlation. I've missed a lot of these due to not realizing that a question is actually testing causation/correlation, and for failure to properly map out the causation/correlation logic and to think of the correct prephrases (X causes A and B, A causes B rather than B causes A, etc) when tackling these questions.

I've already drilled all of the weaken, flaw, and strengthen Q's in PT's 20-30, but am still struggling with them to a certain extent as I'm doing PTs. Over the past 2 months, I've also already done all the LR sections from PT 29-40.

I blind review after I do the section. As I stated earlier, the above misses (-8/-7) are my blind review scores. I've been getting -8/-7 on LR's for like the past 4 PT's I've taken -- even though I've been blind reviewing after each section and have drilled from PT's 20-30s.

The way I blind review - As i do a LR section, I circle questions that I'm not 100% sure I got right. I usually circle around 8-10 Q's for BR. After time finishes, I go back to those circled questions and then try to re work them out again with no time limit. When I try to rework them again, I read the stimulus, identify conclusion and premise, and then try to identify the concrete reasons why 4 AC's are wrong and 1 AC is right. This is all happening in my head, so I potentially might not be as rigorous in doing this as I should be. For many of these circle questions, I end up changing the answer, and sometimes my new answer is right, and sometimes the new answer is wrong.

My BR misses and misses in general are kind of all over the place. They can fall into several categories: 1) questions I'm completely spoofed where I'll change the answer like 2 times during BR and still get it wrong. 2) I was down to 2 AC's and picked the wrong one. 3) Silly mistake where I should've gotten it right - I just rushed too quickly and chose a wrong AC without clearly eliminating the rest of the AC's. 4) Overconfidence error - where I didn't circle the question in BR and chose the trap AC that 70% of other test takers chose as well (these are often the level 5 questions where there's a very attractive trap AC...an example is PT 40.1.23).

In general, many of my misses are level 3-5 questions, with many of them being level 4/5.

For questions I get wrong, I watch JY's video explanation and scroll through the comments for that question to see other ppl's explanation. I also go on Manhattan's LR forum and Powerscore's LR forum to look at other answer explanations/ways to look at the question.

I'm kinda frustrated that I'm hitting this -8/-7 LR wall, especially after trying to work hard to improve it. I really want to try to get my LR score down to like -2 per section. I've been mostly focusing on my BR score because if my BR score is still -7, how can I get my timed score down to -2? Trying to go step by step -- and to first get my BR score as low as I can, and then work on ramping up speed.

I'm starting to see the patterns/cookie cutters in the various LR sections, but I still get tripped/tricked by the harder questions, which is kinda frustrating. There are always like three or four level 5 questions in a LR section, and I often get a few of those wrong.

I think moving forward, I really want to reexamine/redo/review all of the wrong LR questions I got and just try to redo them in my head, systematically break them down, etc. I think I've done around 25 PT's in total, mostly from PT's 20-40, so if it's an average of like 10 LR questions wrong per test, I'll be reviewing about 250 wrong LR questions these next few days.

Any advice or suggestions moving forward to get my LR score down to like -2 per section?

Also, out of curiosity, how long did it take you guys to get your LR section down to -1/-2?

Thanks guys.

Hello 7sage community! This is my first time posting here but I've been reading the forum for quite some time. I'm posting as I have a question from prep test 53 (https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-53-section-1-question-09/). I'm wondering why answer choice A is a necessary assumption. The answer choice is that the decline in population of nesting females is proportional to that of the larger population My thought is that this is not a necessary assumption as the argument's conclusion could still be valid if the general population was declining MORE than the nesting female population (which would mean the decline was not proportional). This also made me wonder whether a necessary assumption relates to the argument or conclusion. In other words, is an assumption necessary if its falsehood destroys the argument but still allows for the possibility of the truth of the conclusion? Thank you in advance for the help.

NOTE: I edited this post because I was unaware that we could not directly quote the test. My apologies.

Admin note: edited title (formatting)

Hey all,

So for some SA Q that use logic and are formulaic, there are cases where there are 2 premises in the stimulus, and it turns out that you're only supposed to use one as the "bridge" or "link" to get to the conclusion. The other premise is thus USELESS. How do you know/decide which premise to use?

An example is PrepTest June 2007, Section 2, #23.

2 premises are stated in the stimulus. You then have to figure out the common sense assumption that one element in the conclusion links up to ONE premise, and then use that as the bridge to the conclusion. the other premise is thus useless/nonrelavent.

it's easy to say this now after knowing the correct answer choice, but when you're doing SA questions on the fly and you're presented with multiple premises/bridges/conditional statements, how do you know which one to use, and on the flip sides, which ones are useless?

Many thanks for the help.

Hi everyone,

I'm gearing up for June and LG is holding me back from easily scoring in the 170s. Over the last four PTs I'm averaging -6.5 on this section. I've been studying for over half a year, and I already did PT 1-35 FPing. Before the last four PTs I used to go approximately -3 (never -0), but now I'm -6.5. I even took two weeks off from PTing in March to focus on LG--did drilling by type, but on the two PTs afterwards I got -5 and -6 on LG. Worth mentioning that I do the pacifico method with each new weekly PT I take.

As expected, I BR 100% nearly every time. During the exam here's what I think happens: I go too slow (feel this most during my setups; often feel rushed for the last game/or the game I skip and come back to at the end), my setups aren't 100% (sometimes I freeze while diagramming/miss an opportunity to optimally diagram), I make avoidable (in hindsight) mistakes with questions. I've also been running a list of every mistake I've made, if anyone wants more info.

Maybe my procedure is sloppy? (I also wrote up a worddoc describing my ideal procedure, lol I'm trying everything.) Idk what's up. Getting frustrated because this is the section everyone says is easiest to improve on, but it doesn't seem that way for me.

Now I'm at a loss as to how to improve and would appreciate targeted help. I know I need to do more drilling but I want to be efficient about it before June. Should I be doing more sets of LGs from new PTs? Does this sound like time pressure anxiety?

Would really appreciate any words of advice (3(/p)

does anyone else find that they do worse on LR practice problems from tests before 2001? I find myself struggling with old problems more, particularly the vocabulary.

The correct answer choice (E) states that the argument "implies that brains and muscle are similar in one respect because they are similar in another respect." If the first respect refers to being able to improve if exercised, what is the latter respect?

The question stem in this question reads: "In order for the conclusion that Bevex is safe for people to be properly drawn, which one of the following must be true?"

Before doing blind review, I labelled this question as a MBT question (as is also labelled on 7Sage). However, after some thought, this question seems much better suited as a SA question. Does anyone agree?

I've been studying for about four months now, at first I started out getting -8 on LR. I did the core curriculem, and I'm still getting -8 on LR. I go back and BR, I write down the types of questions I got wrong. I go back to core curriculem or the LSAT trainer and focus on those questions. The one silver lining is, I'll get -5 every now and then on my second LR section, and it's always my second LR section that I do better on, but yea. I know this takes a while but it's just very frustrating. Not sure what to do guys. Any help is appreciated.

Thanks

I did see a post on distinguishing these argument forms a little while ago, but my question is when are these applicable? I only imagine that these are helpful with SA, PSA, F/DW, type questions, though I imagine it could be useful in all question types. Are there any other sections of the LSAT where this lesson will be needed? How often/where do you find yourself coming back to these forms while studying or PTing?

Finally done with the LR section of CC and going through my notes.

I dont remember which exact LR question this is from but I remember one of the questions said something along the lines of "doing A will ensure that B happens."

I have in my notes A -> B, but I want to make sure I didnt write that down wrong.

It sounds like A is sufficient for the occurence of B, not that A is necessary to make B happen.

Thoughts?

Hi Guys,

Can anyone explain the differences between

Marxism

Socialism

Communism

Capitalism

Fascism

Nazism

Differences between these with examples or any Video explanation?

Thanks in Advance. :)

Hey guys, I'm doing some LR drills and I can't seem to wrap my head around the correct answer for this question. Here's my lawgic for the stimulus:

L(LCF) --> FA --> ~~MR~~

L~~LCF)~~ --> S --> ICW --> MR

~~S~~ --> ~~ICW~~ --> ~~MR~~

When doing the drill, I picked C because: S --> ICW --> ~~MR~~ must be false. The sufficient is satisfied so the rule must trigger, which means that MR can't be negated.

According to the question bank, though, D is the correct answer. My lawgic translation for that choice is as follows: ~~S~~ --> ~~ICW~~ --> ~~MR~~

It seems to me that D could be true. I know I'm missing something, but I just can't see it. Any insight, my friends?