https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/only-planet-with-life-flaw-question/

for AC b i equated many=some and chose e instead as it was a statement for “most” systems….but suppose since it is ratios in consideration similarity weighs more (hence not requiring exact no of planets to match) making b the correct answer choice….

does my line of reasoning sound right??

Anyone here interested in studying for the December LSAT in PST?

I was reviewing game 4 of preptest 81 and for question 23 JY mentioned the “core curriculum on substitution equivalence.” I’m on the cusp of understanding what he means with the knock out/sneak in test, but I need a little more. I can’t find the discussion listed as such in the core and assume it’s part of another lesson. Anyone know where so I don’t have to watch them all again? ? thank you!

Hi all 7-sagers! Does anyone have a list or know where I can find a list of Weaken questions that contain causality? I've pin pointed this as an area to work on. Thanks!!

Hi there, looking for someone to talk through some question with over skype maybe 1x a week in prep for December test. Scoring pretty well overall, but would love to bounce some ideas/reasoning off of others.

Hi everyone,

I was hoping to get some of your guys' sage advice on timing and accuracy. Recently, I've been doing a lot of focused drilling on LR. I took a PT yesterday, and I found my accuracy has improved. However, I'm finding it a little bit harder to complete all the questions ( I feel myself scrambling at times on the last five questions). Has this happened to anyone else? I used to be able to finish all 25 or 26 questions, but now I find myself leaving one or two blank. Is there a way to improve my timing while ensuring that my accuracy doesn't increase? At this point, should I continue drilling, or should I start doing timed section? Both?

Thanks in advance!

After receiving a shocking RC score on the September LSAT, I'm working on improving it for December. I've found that "read for structure" is a common suggestion. I've had trouble implementing that, but when I do manage to do so, the passage is super easy. I've found these common structures for LSAT passages:

If I manage to identify the passage as one of those four things, it's almost like having a road map. Often I won't miss any on that passage. Are there any other obvious structures I'm missing or am I maybe just bad at identifying them?

Hi all,

I noticed in some recent videos JY recommends checking the MBT question answer choices as you make inferences so you don't do extra work. And in principle that makes sense. But it doesn't seem like that rule is consistently followed? Sometimes the videos go significantly further in making inferences before going to the answer choices, even going as far as to draw out multiple boards for a single question rather than checking the answers after an inference, then, if that's not there, going further down the inference chain. And sometimes the videos end up with the ultimate inference and then checks the answer choices for that ultimate inference even though there are multiple MBT inferences along the way. Is that process just skipped for time reasons in the videos? Or because checking in between each inference is sometimes counterproductive (makes you lose your train of thought)? Is there an element of hindsight when explaining knowing when to stop with a certain inference and when to go further?

The explanation for #21 in the PT82 game 4 is a good example (at ~14:00 minute mark):

The first MBT inference is that W gets S. The second MBT inference is that R doesn't get S. The third MBT inference is that R doesn't get M. The fourth MBT inference is that R gets J. Should we be checking the answers after every inference?

Hey guys! Fiesta here again.

So I have come across some points of confusion with PSA question types on my last PT runs. Usually, I found success with PSA questions by thinking about them like SA questions. Find the conditional that triggers P and concludes C. However, there have been a couple PSA questions that I have had trouble with because they do not fit this mold (68.2.5/68.2.13/68.2.16). I can't remember the specific video, but J.Y mentioned that PSA questions can be treated like STRENGTHEN questions under certain circumstances. I can see how that is helpful, but I was wondering what tactics yall have for attacking these PSA types that do not conform to the usual SA structure?

In almost every reading passage I've done, there's always ONE paragraph that gets complex and it requires me to take some extra time to re-read and understand that paragraph. But I hesitate to do this bc I feel this monster breathing down my neck yelling me to GO FASTER. Trust me, I KNOWWWWW it's only going to hurt me if I don't understand the passage, so does anyone have any mental tips on how they allow themselves to take extra time to read something when needed? I'm feeling this especially now as I'm doing the memory method and am trying to meet the 3:30 mark.

Also, any tips on how people have come to craft effective low res main points for paragraphs? I feel like I'm missing the mark sometimes....

Thanks!!

I understand why answer choice C is correct, but I can't seem to be able to rule answer choice B out. Can someone explain why answer choice B isn't the answer/ why answer choice C is better?

The way I see it answer choice B does significantly weaken the argument because it's showing that people are in fact motivated by money in their job choices, especially if they're identical in all other aspects.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-60-section-1-question-13

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-19-section-1-game-2/

For this game I misunderstood the rule. Can someone explain what consecutive would translate to in logic games? I assumed consecutive could mean two L's are placed on the same day as well. Also having trouble in general with games that have more slots than characters. Any advice?

I do not see any in the CC

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-43-section-2-question-20/

I find this to be the most interesting LR question I've come across, because I'm pretty darn sure it requires you to make an inference leap based on common sense. Rule #1 about LSAT logical reasoning -- common sense inferences are thrown out the window unless they're supported by the passage.

Answer choice D is the credited answer. Answer choice D requires you to make an assumption that's not in LSAT world. What's your thoughts?

I chose B.

Hey guys!

So I have consistently been getting a BR Score that is on average close to my Target score nonetheless getting questions correct and completing them all within the time allotted has proven to be difficult for me.

I would still like to aim for higher than my target score though I only have so much time until the December test so I feel like it's wise to start working on timing now.

I have one month until Test Day. What has worked for you guys in terms of timing for each section?

As for trying to still get those harder LR questions. I plan on drilling down specific question types, however I find that near the end of each LR section is when I start having trouble with questions.

(P1) A recent study shows that there is a correlation between refusing to think about your problems and getting gum disease.

(P2) Stress causes suppression of the immune system.

(C) The recent study shows that suppression of the immune system causes higher levels of gum disease

(NA) Refusing to think about your problems increases a person's level of stress.

Why do we have to assume that refusing to think about your problems CAUSES increased levels of stress? To me, it just seems that we are only required to assume that those who refuse to think about there problems are more stressed. Maybe it is the stress that causes them not to think about their problems... Who knows! I don't see why we have to assume a causal relationship between the two for the argument to work.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-70-section-4-question-10/

Can someone please explain and map out the logic for this question, and explain why (E) is the correct answer? The last sentence of the stimulus is tripping me up. Greatly appreciated!

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-25-section-2-question-21/

I could not detect the conclusion in the stimulus, therefore initially chose answer choice (A).

After reviewing, I just want to confirm if the conclusion is the sentence that starts with "Increasing the number of electric cars on the road..."

Hi everyone!

I was going over the questions I got wrong and I really do not understand what C is saying. I understand why all of the other AC are incorrect, I also understand why D is correct; however, I am having trouble understanding what C is saying. From what I understand: is C saying that only one cause can have one effect? But isn’t Ray saying that the effect (trunk popping) could be caused by anything other than a pothole? Or maybe I’m not understanding the logic of this question? It was shocking that I got this question wrong because I have usually only been getting questions near the end wrong. I really don’t understand why C is wrong. Can someone please clarify?

Thank you!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-54-section-4-question-04/

Is the sentence that starts with "As plausible as this may sound, at least one thing remains mysterious...," the conclusion of this stimulus?

So the main point would not be whatever comes after the sentence, which mainly talks about how there were no increases in temperature following earthquakes. Therefore, we can eliminate (A) and (D)...right?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-30-section-4-question-02/

Hi y'all!

I took the Testmasters course for the September LSAT, started studying in July with a cold diagnostic of 153. My highest PT was a 169 two days before the LSAT (I had been steadily PTing around 165-170), and ended up with a 167 on test day.

During the course I had been knocked out by a nasty case of food poisoning for two weeks or so (I ended up in the hospital. Do NOT, I repeat, do NOT go to the Chipotle on N. State in Chicago) and had missed a lot of critical time for test prep. I sucked it up and took the LSAT anyway even though I knew I could've put more time in.

So, after the September scores came out, I registered for December. Upon realizing it was the basically the same price to reactivate my Testmasters account vs. getting 7sage (with like...50 more PTs, I mean c'mon), I have defected! I was wondering if anyone could give me any advice as to how I should go about using 7sage to prep.

My individual section breakdowns usually go something like -6/-7 on RC, -8/-9 on LR, and -0/-1 on LG. On the September test I posted -5 on RC (somehow got Judicial Candor all correct), -10 on LR (a whopping 7 points dropped on the second LR section), and -0 on LG.

LG was my weakest section starting out (I had missed something like 15-20 LG questions on my first diagnostic) so I had put most of my time into Games. Other than drilling individual LR question types and RC sections repeatedly, I didn't give my due diligence to those sections and suffered for it.

I've skimmed through a few course videos already but don't really know how to structure my study schedule around the material. I don't feel it's feasible (or efficient) to do all 800 hours of the course before December. Should I just be doing more PTs? Identify what weaknesses? Figure out what the hell a Blind Review is? Give up completely? Any advice is appreciated. Thanks in advance.

The conclusion in the stimulus, I believe, starts from "However, as a result of its attempt..."

Here, the taxpayer is saying that due to the fiscal irresponsibility of Metro City, they now have to spend a lot more money on reconstruction of its bridges.

However, I thought answer choice (A) is too strong and suggestive of an answer, therefore chose (D) after process of elimination.

Author clearly doesn't state that they 'should' have budgeted more money for maintenance of its bridges. So how is this a MP question? It seems like the stimulus contains premises and answer choice is the actual conclusion--more like a MSS question.

Can someone confirm that the last sentence is the conclusion, and also explain how answer choice A makes sense?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-25-section-4-question-01/

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-32-section-4-question-24/

Can someone please explain this? I got the right answer but I can't justify my reasoning

As a group, we were BR'ing this question and we could not figure out what the difference was between AC "A" and AC "C". The correct answer seems to hinge on the difference between "Average" (AC C) and Sometimes (AC A). The Stimulus states "Usually a few inches..." to parallel the concept of "usually", why is "Average" closer than "Sometimes"?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-73-section-4-question-18/

I have a question regarding a logical translation of "derive solely from." This is from the answer choice (D) in PT62.S4.Q15. https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-62-section-4-question-15/

This question is an easy PSA question, and the argument is basically like this:

　　　P: A counterfeit doesn't give any less aesthetic pleasure than a real diamond

　　　——–——–

　　　C: A real diamond and a counterfeit are equally valuable

So we need "Pleasurable --> Valuable." And (D) is the only answer choice that says something close:

The value derive solely from the pleasure. (modified version of answer choice (D) in PT62.S4.15)

Is it ok to translate this as "If it is pleasurable, it is valuable"?

　Pleasurable --> Valuable

In the video, J.Y. says that D is saying "How much is it worth? The only thing you gotta check is aesthetic pleasure it provides" so I think it is ok to translate as above, but I can also interpret it as:

The value depends on the pleasure.

And I think it would mean:

　Valuable --> Pleasurable

Can you help me figure out what derive solely from means?