Hi all,

When should we look at the context of a stimulus when considering an answer choice. After CC, I was under the impression that we should always disregard context; however, a lot of correct answer choices take context into account. For example in PT 72 S2 Q4, the correct answer is A, and the subject matter of A falls within the context, so I immediately crossed that answer out.

Is there a particular rule to follow in regards to context and when to disregard?

Thanks in advance!

**Admin note: **

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-72-section-2-question-24/

Hi,

I am about 60% complete with the 7sage core curriculum. I signed up for the Ultimate+ option and have dozens of PTs available. However, I wanted some insights on the number of PTs I should be doing per week once I complete the curriculum? I will most likely be completed by first to second week of November. I will be sitting for the January LSAT. Thanks for your insights!

Hi everyone,

I'm having trouble with question 9. How can the answer "B?"

Admin note: edited title

Hi all, I started doing timed past tests but can't finish LG sections (LR and RC are fine). Should I come back and finish the leftover LG questions untimed but continue doing the rest timed? How should I go about doing timed prep tests now?

When I started studying full time, approximately four months ago, LG was by far my worst section. With diligent practice and doing the full-proof method, I have significantly raised my average performance. Now, it seems that I am plateauing with LR... LR is now pretty much my worst section(s) and also my least favorite sections to take.

Any tips?

I've done all the core curriculum and looked over the lessons that I think I feel the most uncomfortable with several times. I've seen that I've missed some of the Weakening and Strengthening questions which are basically freebies, and when BR'ing I say to myself, "Why in the hell are you missing these?!"

Hi guys, so I'm writing the November Lsat and am just trying to really improve on my games by then. My average score over the last month is about 156, and I'd like to score anywhere from 158-161 (I've scored in this range on occurrence twice so it is not out of the realm of possibility). Good thing is i know my weak spots and how to get to there and its games, of course. On average i miss about 8 questions per section, getting as many as 12-13 wrong. Most Practice Tests i don't make it to the last game just because of time.

Any tips on how to get consistently to -3 or -4 by November? If i could get into this range, heck even 5 wrong I have no doubt i'll get my desired score. I'd like to start Fool Proofing but i really don't have time to do PT 1-35 as others have suggested. I'm in school full time at the moment and work part-time on the side. Are there maybe 10-12 sections you guys personally think i ought to master that will help me with my goal? Also, should i hold off on doing more practice tests until i get Games down? Any other advice would be appreciated too. Thanks in advance!

Hey all,

I am working through the LG portion of the CC while fool-proofing. This by far has been the best way to learn and master LG. Its only been a week and I feel like I'm learning so much.

I have a question for those who have finished fool-proofing.

I'm spending about 4 hours a day purely focused on LG and fool-proofing 5-6 days a week. I honestly do not see it taking longer than a month at this rate, but please let me know if I am wrong.

Cheers and thanks in advance :)

I’ve been through the CC, and I’ve gone back and repeated basic and advanced logic. I’m still losing a massive amount of points because I’m having trouble translating English to logical statements. What did you guys do to master this?

I know it's a bad idea to argue with LSAT answers, but I find it's the best way to improve - I want to really understand exactly why my thinking is wrong. I can't seem to find out an adiqute explination for why D is wrong for this question, would love some input, I have scoured the forums but cant seem to find anyone discussing this line of attack. Thanks in advance if you take the time to look this up!

The arguement is:

chem fert caused farmers to switch from alfalfa

Alfalfa caused good soil.

C: We must Abandon chem fert in order to get good soil back.

necessicary assumption?

Evaluating this argument, it seems like the obvious consideration is that farmers could use both chems while renewing the soil. Why would we need to abandon chems? The answer needs to say that. And that sounds like what E is saying.

But when you consider this further, theres litterally nothing in the argument that says the only way to improve soil is GM method. it's easy to imagine another way to renew soil, maybe soil rotation or something. Maybe they could grow soybeans, which cause very little soil degradation when compared to other cash crops, like corn, which doesnt stand up to soybeans in both financial benefits and environmental considerations. The point is that there's really no reason to think GM is necessicary to improving soil health at all. When we consider the many potential, possibly infinite ways to improve soil health, having a single one be incomparable with chems seems to do little to improve are argument at all.

another assumption which would make the conclusion follow would be if soil improvement cannot happen as long as these chems are present in the soil. the very presence of these chemicals in the soil insures the soil cannot improve. A perfect answer could be.

"no matter what methods the farmers persue, their can be no soil improvement as long as chemical fert in question are present in the soil"

Theres no answer that says this, but D says

"chemical fert have a destructive effect on soil".

destructive is a strong word, and this holds in every case- regardless of what you do to improve the soil health, as long as their is chemicals in the soil, these chems will have a destructive effect which could conceivably limit improvement.

E is right and D is wrong. What am I failing to consider here? Thanks again if you took the time to address my question!

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-73-section-2-question-20/

Hi everyone,

I’m curious to see how everyone’s progress went. I’ve been studying consistently for a little over a month now (started looking at the LR section in July and tried to find the best techniques and learning strategies for me), and I’m doing practice questions in LR specifically, and I’m usually getting about 50% of them correct. Should I be really concerned? How did everyone else improve on the LR section? I think that I’ll need to move my test date to January since I’m not even through the RC or Games curriculums yet. Thoughts? Any comments are appreciated!

Although already noted that MSS Qs are similar or can even be mistaken as Main Point Qs, I am not fully understanding on my own (without J.Y. pointing it out) what wording in the question stem makes an MSS Q. just that, an MSS Q.

For instance, unless the Q. stem directly states or contains "....is most strongly supported by...." I really cannot tell what makes an MSS Q. an MSS Q.

#help

Is there anyone out there who was able to defeat these Author Inference questions? These consistently make up about half of my missed RC questions and I have no idea how to approach them and why they're so hard for me. #help

Taking at least a minute over but the steps I follow and the inferences I arrive at are exactly same. However, I am reading off of the screen and doing the game on paper, would that make a difference?

If some of you faced this, why is this? And how do I get generally faster at LG? I am already foolproofing and I see a difference but I am still slower than JY's estimates. Sometimes by 2 minutes, sometimes by 30 seconds.

i've heard many 170+ scorers rarely map out logic or do any writing when taking timed PT's.

How long did it take you to get there?

Do top scorers NEVER map out logic, or hand write notes while taking timed PT's?

For certain SA and MBT lawgic questions, sometimes I feel that I HAVE to write out the lawgic. There are just so many ideas to juggle around, and it's so difficult to keep track of them all in my mind.

the tough thing is the convoluted GRAMMER/referential phrasing plus the logic. It's really hard to keep all those ideas straight in my head without hand mapping it out.

Any general ideas/suggestions on how to get to a point of mastery/fluency with logic??? one example of this is that i wouldn't have to hand write out logic when i see it?

#Help

Hey guys, I'm having difficulty understanding this question. It states:

Admin note: Please review the forum rules:

Do not post LSAT questions, any copyrighted content, or links to content that infringe on copyright.

I am having a hard time understanding Frank's argument. I know Lance is saying the minimum experiences teach us is that every general rule has at least one exception. But what I don't understand is how Frank came to the conclusion that there is at least one general rule that has no exceptions.. If anyone can explain, it'd be super helpful :)

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-56-section-2-question-11/

I have hard time understanding the answer choice C;

It is a claim...cited by the argument as evidence of its truth...

What does "its" refer to?

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-67-section-4-question-22/

Not sure if there are many people who have already solved this PT but would really appreciate the opportunity to pick your brains regarding this question.

I initially chose D. My reasoning was that looking at mortality patterns with other animals could perhaps reinforce or weaken the idea that more full grown male horse bones = people rode horses. What if mortality patterns of domesticated goats living with the Botai also shows that they had more full-grown males, thus also going against the typical pattern for domesticated animal usage? What if the Botai people just really love male animals? Basically my reasoning was that looking at mortality patterns of other animals could be a point of comparison.

I guess the weakness to my reasoning is that even if goats or other animals go against the typical hypothesis re: domesticating animals, the hypothesis regarding domestication of horses could still be true? So in essence it may not be a good point of comparison and may not yield any information to evaluate the hypothesis? I'm not sure, just trying to pick holes in my reasoning.

I also tried to reason for A: So I'm thinking this is a way for the author to evaluate whether the presence of more male bones than female bones is good enough evidence for the conclusion. If more bones show signs of being gnawed on or something, it could maybe weaken the claim that the Botai people rode horses.

Am I on the right track with A? What do you think regarding my explanation for D?

Admin note: edited title

Hi y'all. So, I registered to take the Nov test, but with school and other stuff, I really have had no time to prepare. First, when I registered, I thought I would be able to designate time for studying, but unfortunately, that was not the case. So, should I still take the test with no preparation after all I paid for it. Do law schools consider the average, or do they receive all the scores I get in the past? I am very worried. Please help, thank you!!

Hi all,

I was wondering what I should do when I get to the point in a section where I feel like I already completed my blind review. I am mostly asking this about LR as I generally finish all of the questions with 5+ minutes left and have plenty of time to go back and review the questions that I was unsure of. Sometimes I will have sections where I have several minutes at the end that I don't even know what to do with. With all that in mind, how should I approach blind review for these sections? Am I past the blind review stage for LR or is there a deeper blind review strategy than this? Also, as a note I am scoring between -1 and -5 depending on section difficulty.

I'm preparing for the November test, which will be my second attempt. Does anyone have any good study strategies that work for them in preparing to take the test again?

These are all my incorrect questions that pop up the most as wrong answers. What can I do to fix weaknesses on these types of questions?

Question stem: would be most helpful to know in order to evaluate the argument?

I am not familiar to this questions stem. Does anyone have strategies in attacking these kind of q's?

Thank you!

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-74-section-1-question-21/

Hi y'all,

It's the passage about serotonin and I have a quick question. I was down to A and D and chose D and then switched to A. At first I was drawn to D because it said the body's desire for carbs CAN BE influenced by serotonin... And the second sentence in the first paragraph says "The answer to this question IS NOT KNOWN but ... SEEMS TO BE... SEROTONIN..." Not known/seems to be matches with Can be in the answer choice whereas A) says VARIES with. The author is less confident than that. Was I thinking the right way the first time?

Thank you!

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-12-section-3-passage-4-passage/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-12-section-3-passage-4-questions/

What are your tips on how to improve on the Reading Comp section?

I notice that I get a handful of questions wrong on every Reading Comp section and I'd like to hear from fellow 7sage students as to how they best tackle the passages. 7sage recommends understanding every sentence before reading on, being an active reader, feigning interest in the passage if necessary, and "pushing back".

Are there any rules that you live by for Reading Comp? What have you found to be most effective? How do you "read actively"?

I find it best to mentally summarize each paragraph after reading it and trying to relate it to the other paragraphs in the passage. I also try to stay vigilant for the author's tone and opinion. For more technical passages, I try to be extra careful for referential phrasing.

Feel free to share!

Hey everyone. I’m in a panic about my score. To be competitive where I want to go, I need to score a 163 or higher. I need to compensate for my LSAT (3.3). I took in September and scored as follows:

RC: -8

LR: -5

LG: -11

LR: -10

Do I have any chance of making the improvement I need before the November test? What should I focus on? Thanks in advance.