Just realized that LSAC changed my Sept. LSAT test date and location. My new location is Kwun Tong Government Secondary School. And the new date is Sept. 16th, which is 1 day earlier than the original date. Is this an error or a real change? Have to rebook the hotel. However, I haven't receive any email notice about this change from LSAC.

Anyone same as me?

Updated 9/14 1:40 p.m.

Second call info:

I've you've expressed interest in the December study group you should have received this message in your inbox.

1. Take PT 55 and BR on your own before the call.

2. Submit the questions you want to review here https://goo.gl/forms/b6ZcWJxFT2EaVuq83

Note: we will not be reviewing LG and will prioritize LR questions.

3. Comment on this post if you plan on joining so I can send the link to discord server and additional info to your inbox.

Let me know if you have any questions!

Studying for the February 2018 LSAT anyone else? Am I the first to post? Is it necessary to study for this long period of time? Will anyone ever see my topic? Find out next year!

One of the RC passages in Sept. 2009 was about copyright and tangible object theory (TOT). In general, the passage goes like this (working from memory here since it's not with me at the moment but it's been bothering me all day):

P1 - Intro of TOT and the VP of proponents - that copyright and other IP rights apply to tangible objects

P2 - extension of P1, with the intro of retained rights concept

P3 - says that TOT has chief advantage of justifying IP rights "without recourse to the popular but problematic assumption that ideas can be copyrighted" or something like that.

I was very confused by that statement in P3. It reads to me like TOT (which holds that tangible objects can be protected) is justifying IP rights while also NOT being COUNTER to the idea that intangible objects (like ideas) cannot be copyrighted (or protected under IP Law).

Am I going crazy? If someone is familiar with this passage, can you please help me out?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-58-section-2-passage-3-passage/

I am trying to find a good explanation for answer choice A (correct) over answer choice D (incorrect) on PT.73 LR #1 , Q12.

The stimulus states that the chairperson should not have released the report because they did not consult any other members of the commission before the report was released.

Conclusion: Shouldn't have been released

Premise: Didn't consult

So, what we are looking for is: necessary to consult before it is released.

Answer choice A: It would have been permissible for the chairperson to release only if most of the other member had first given consent

Answer choice D : Would have been justifiable to release only if each of the commission members would have agreed to it being released had they been consulted.

I can't clearly articulate why A is superior to D... 9/10 times I think I would still choose D if I saw this question again.

Can anyone help?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-73-section-2-question-12/

Hey everyone! I'm scheduled to take the Sept. LSAT this Saturday and I am super nervous. I work full time and I plan to apply for the next Fall. I'm at a point right now where I just want a good score to have in my back pocket going into the Dec. LSAT since I probably won't score what I want (170+) this Saturday and I think I will retake in Dec.I don't plan on submitting apps earlier than Jan.

I already cancelled one score from Dec. 2016. Will it be bad if I have two scores and one cancellation? I do really well with BR (173+) but when timed, I score 158,159 etc.

I get why Answer choice D is correct. But I am not wholly convinced why answer choice B is wrong.

Would love any input :)

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-27-section-4-question-07/

okay here is what I did. I scored the lowest I've ever scored on an RC section a week ago. I thought well damn the test is a week away I'm fucked. So I thought.. Zack you know how to read what the hell is your issue. Basically beat myself up for a solid day. Then I decided that I'm going to take my time up front reading the passages and have a SOLID grasp on the questions.

I scored the highest I have ever gotten simply by slowing down and fully comprehending the passages, rather than trying to read faster than I was comprehending.

me trying to read....

![Alt Text] (https://media.giphy.com/media/iqMHmcPIsNm4U/giphy.gif)

This question gave me a lot of problems. I am still not sure how A described the flaw.

For a correlation to be positive, shouldn’t it be smokers who drink caffeinated beverages are more likely to develop HD as compared to smokers who don’t drink caffeinated beverages.

Like really confused here. Can someone clarify?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-50-section-4-question-19/

So I don't really understand how printing multiple copies of the same game and being able to do the games from memory helps me. It just feels like artificial point inflation. Can someone explain? Please and thank you.

I haven't been hitting my target score. I'm a few points away, but I haven't been hitting it.

I signed up for the September LSAT, but now I'm thinking about rescheduling it to December.

I didn't want to do it because I thought maybe that might mean law schools might have already filled up most of their spots by December, so I may have a smaller chance of getting in. Really wanted to start law school next year, and I thought taking in September would be best for timing purposes, but i am not hitting the score I need to hit, so now I'm leaning more towards rescheduling to December. i'm just having a really tough time deciding, so I wanted to get your opinions on this matter.

Thoughts? Advice/suggestions?

Thanks so much.

You've got this. Sleep a lot this week, rest on Friday and eat well! Then give it your all. :)

I am about to start on my PTs but I'm a little hesitant because I am doing so poorly on RC.

Hey everyone,

Good luck to those taking the September exam.

I recently realized that I am severely weak in games that have minimal upfront inferences, require using additional info in the questions, and have more questions that make me try brute forcing through the answer choices. I have 3 questions regarding this type of game:

Any general advice on how to approach these types of games? One problem is that I try to force out an inference (either in the set-up or a particular question), fail to do so, and waste so much time. Yet, this kind of mentality seems to help me when there is actually an inference to be made. Do you have something like a general limit? Like, "if I don't figure out an inference 10 seconds for this question, I am going to brute force it"?

What are some difficult rule-driven/brute-force games that would be good practice?

Is it just me, or do the preptests from 70+ have more of these rule-driven games?

Hey everyone,

I recently came across an LSAT stimulus that gave me loads of trouble when I was taking a PT under time. To ingrain the lesson from that stimulus I drew a parallel argument for it. But I want to make sure that I did it correctly. So I am posting the stimulus I made for you. Let me know which one of the answers you think is correct.

Cats walk very light-footed when compared to other species. While dogs do not chase humans because humans do not get scared of dogs, cats get scared of dogs and need to go unnoticed by dogs to not get chased and thereby end up stuck in trees. Scientists therefore hypothesize that the cats light-footedness, which clearly makes them slower, evolved as a means of going unnoticed by dogs.

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the hypothesis?

A. No human is as light-footed as cats.

B. Being chased by dogs is not the most common cause of death for cats.

C. Many other types of animals have light-footedness similar to that of cats.

D. Cats are much faster than other heavier animals.

E. Dogs that chase cats also chase other species of animals.

I do not understand how E can be the correct answer when it violates the rule stating that two students must have the same reviews. If O is given an S, then M must have a T and a U, but cannot have an S due to J having an S. Thus you would get J=S, K=T, L=U, M=U,T, and O=S,U,T. Can someone please help explain why E is the correct answer?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-42-section-1-game-4/

I chose B under timed conditions but switched to A in BR.

My issue with B is that there are no "potential" criminals here. If B said "nothing should be done to protect criminals at the cost of placing restrictions on law-abiding citizens" then it would be airtight. But "potential" doesn't work because if you are found in the prison directory, then you would have been convicted of a crime to be there in the first place.

I chose A in BR because it made the distinction I referred to above, but it doesn't actually connect to our conclusion so it can't be right.

Hey, everyone.

I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on why the passage supports D more strongly than E. I ended up going with D on the test, but didn't feel like I had an articulable justification for why it was a better choice.

The one thing I can think of is that the existence of a hole in the ozone somewhere other than above Antarctica (and perhaps one even larger than the one over Antarctica) is technically compatible with everything in the passage. Since the passage doesn't rule this out, the passage shouldn't be read as supporting any claims about the relative quantity upward flow of CFCs into the stratosphere above Antarctica.

An issue that made me hesitant about D: The passage indicates that the ozone layer would continue to deteriorate for years or decades even if CFC emission were eliminated immediately and completely. So any lowering of the incidence of skin cancer from such a policy would be very delayed. Maybe this consideration is sort of a trap - it doesn't make the answer choice any less supported by the passage, but does make it somehow intuitively less appealing.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-78-section-4-passage-4-passage/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-78-section-4-passage-4-questions/

Just a heads up-- According to the LSAC's website, the FSU and FGCU testing centers will be closed for the September 16, 2017 test administration date. The LSAC will continue to update its website as it is notified about which centers will be closing.

Hi guys,

It's possible that I'm overthinking this seemingly easy question, but I'm having a lot of trouble eliminating D.

My reasoning is that, if D were to be true and drivers are more alert at crosswalks, it wouldn't matter as much if pedestrians are less careful when crossing there. Even if I don't check both ways at the crosswalk, with D the driver's being more careful could offset this. This would directly weaken the argument.

The only thing I can think of is the fact that the answer says "drivers are generally most alert," which could mean that even if they pay the most attention at crosswalks it still isn't enough to offset the pedestrians not paying attention themselves. Maybe a driver's most alert state is still extremely distracted. Is this enough to eliminate this answer choice, or could there be something I'm missing?

Thanks!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-77-section-4-question-19/

PSA are just not clicking for me and I feel very uncomfortable answering them even when I get them right. I'm drilling them this afternoon and I had some trouble with this question. Any tips on PSA in general would be great as well as input on this question.

Context:

There is a hypothesis that dreams are produced when the brain erases "parasitic connections" which accumulate during the day and take up space in our brain. Ant-eaters are the only mammals that doesn't have REM (when we humans have our most vivid dreams). The ant-eater has a very large brain in relation to the animal's size.

Conclusion:

This fact (ant-eaters don't REM and have big brains) provides some confirmation for the hypothesis above.

Premise:

The hypothesis predicts that for an animal have an effective memory and not dream, that animal would need extra space in the brain to account for the parasitic connections which aren't erased each night.

What I'm looking for:

Most of this question is context and that made it a little difficult for me to zone in on the conclusion and premise, not to mention it is a pretty wordy stimulus. We need to connect the premise to the conclusion. The ant-eater's anatomy aligns with the hypothesis' prediction and the argument concludes that that provides support for some confirmation of that hypothesis.

Answer Choices:

A) Facts about one species of animal (ant-eaters don't REM and have big brains) can provide confirmation for hypotheses about all species that are similar in relevant ways. I really liked this under timed conditions because it seemed to fit the mold I was looking for. Ant-eaters are mammals (similar in the relevant ways) and the author is using the facts about that animal to provide support for the hypothesis. The issue with this AC is that despite the strong language, it doesn't meet the level of sufficiency needed because it says "can". Well, does it?

B) Strike 1: we only have 1 prediction. Strike 2: how can we know that the majority of predictions is confirmed when we don't enough know how many predictions there are? Eliminate.

C) That's not the method of partial confirmation. Our stimulus provides a little confirmation by fitting the predicted circumstances when the hypothesis is irrelevant. Eliminate.

D) "Partially confirmed"... that's good. And the second half is good as well. The hypothesis itself doesn't explain why ant-eaters wouldn't dream, but its anatomy fits the prediction made about cases that do not fall under the hypothesis. I didn't fully grasp the different between the prediction and the hypothesis under times conditions. And I latched onto A and brought confirmation bias into the remaining AC. Correct.

E) There is only 1 hypothesis. Eliminate.

Can anybody tell me what this answer choice is exactly saying? I just want to know what it's trying to say because I don't think I'm completely understanding it.

It was a flaw in reasoning question (Preptest December 2015, Section 2, LR, Question 18.)

Answer Choice E from this particular question says "makes use of an assumption that one would accept only if one has already accepted the truth of the conclusion."

This may be a dumb question, but I really can't figure out what this answer choice is exactly saying... can someone explain this for me? Thanks so much!

#pleasebeafriend

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-77-section-2-question-18/

Quick Question: Is it necessary to read the directions every time you repeat a game during foolproofing? I just do it to simulate everything as it would be in a real exam.

Does anyone have any additional advice for reading comp? I am getting like -4 on LR, and -2 on LG but then Reading comp I'm getting like -12's. Trying the memory method but it just doesn't seem to be sticking? Looking just for some other tactics that have worked for people that I could try.

Thanks.

This advice might be too little too late for those of you next week, but if it can be helpful for anyone...

I have been struggling mightily with confidence and have seen my scores dip significantly in the past couple of weeks. Part of the struggle is due to the fact that the last time I sat for the test, I massively underperformed and was miserable over my score. So miserable that I swore off the LSAT/law school for several years.

Once I got back into prep, I decided that I was going to save that PT for right before the test to prove to myself that I was much better prepared, could do this, blah, blah, blah. I hadn't looked at the PT since getting my score back so it was essentially fresh. (Did I mention that I swore off the test for so long that my original score is no longer on the record? (Gross I'm old/thank goodness.))

Long story short, I went from a 160 to a 176, and was one question away from a 180 in BR.

I say this not as a humble brag (ok, maybe a little bit of that) but because I have more confidence now than I've had at any point in my prep. I think a huge mental hurdle for retakers is the fact that you KNOW it can go sub-optimally. But by taking the one that originally got the best of you...well, you get what I'm saying.

(Also, major props to 7Sage because even if I hadn't underperformed as much as I did, I still wouldn't be close to the level I'm at now.)