When a rule says S is a higher number than N, is that S-N or N-S? Does higher mean lower?

My brain is in that weird place where I can feel myself over thinking..

Hi,

This might be a silly question but for D... It says "A scientific model that contains many elements is not a good theory"

And, on the premise, in order to be a good scientific theory your model needs to be simple enough to contain only a few elemnents...

From what I learned... Many is some ...

Is there difference between few and some?

I missed question 4. I actually couldn’t pick an answer because they all appeared to work as I moved my l–n block around for each answer choice. I remember learning that when you have to go backwards in the chain that means those items on the other leg of the chain have no relation. So as I looked at my chain the l–n block had no relation to H, so I am missing the inference that I was supposed to pick up that indicated that nothing could be lower than H or that H had the 9 spot on lock down.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-4-section-3-game-1/

It's supposed to help with understanding topics you're unfamiliar with and just a supplement to actual studying.

I have a tedious desk job and used to play netflix in the background but now I'm trying to do something to stimulate my brain a bit. I've been listening to Radio Lab.

Or audiobook recs!

Ok so this question gave me a world of trouble. I looked up the explanation given on Manhattan and I think I get it but I need confirmation.

My main problem is that the explanation given doesn't seem to use the contrapositive (which I attempted to use) but rather 2 separate worlds for each one.

"In this world, you are either rich or poor, and you are either honest or dishonest. All poor farmers are honest. Therefore, all rich farmers are dishonest."

Now taking away the farmers part, the explanation went on to list the premises as:

R-->/P If you are rich, then you are not poor

/R-->P If you are not rich, then you are poor.

H-->/D If you are honest, then you are not dishonest.

/H-->D If you are not honest, then you are dishonest.

These don't line up as contrapositives but rather separate worlds it seems. When used with the conclusion though, you can reach AC A as the right answer.

R-->/P

/P->/H

/H-->D

R-->D

So am I on the right track? You treat the premises as separate worlds?

Hey all!

Does anyone have any advice on which PTs are essential to cover before the February test? Obviously tricky ones like 79, 81... but any others? If you felt like you struggled in a certain aspect of the test, was there a PT that you thought was personally really helpful that you covered?

To everyone studying for the February test (like me) we can do it! Good luck to all!

I'm really having trouble with this question. Am I supposed to approach it as a sufficient assumption question though it's a flaw question? Thanks in advance!

Is there a difference between A --> (B-->C) vs A --> B or C

If so, what is the contrapositive of the A --> (B-->C)

I haven’t gotten an email from LSAC yet, and my score is not showing up online. Anyone else in the same boat? Should I be worried?

Writing down my reasoning to understand better where I'm going wrong.

Available coal supplies = Total coal mined- Total coal consumed in a year

1991- Total coal mined =100

Total coal consumed= 70

Available coal supplies = 30

1990 - Total coal mined = 100

Total coal consumed = 50

Available coal supplies = 50

There are two possibilities I see-

1.Either there is less consumption in 90

2. More coal was mined in 90

This made me chose AC (D) . I feel like I'm missing something basic with answer choice B or my understanding of the stimulus is wrong. Any clarifications would be great!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-20-section-1-question-24/

Hello,

I have been really struggling to get a grasp over Logic Games. I sat the LSAT in September and completely messed up everything related to LG. So I have two questions, any advice would be awesome :)

How do you avoid freezing/having a mental blank that completely ruins the whole section? AND

Any tips to make sure that you have made all possible inferences when drawing up your game board?

Thanks and good luck!

Josh

Is D correct because the paragraph only gave one reason why it's justifiable to fabricate someone's remarks?

What kind of flaw is this? ... exclusivity?

Hello 7Sagers!

I'm going through the core curriculum a second time, and I have a question about the negation of and/or statements in conditional relationship! If, for example, we have a statement that reads "If Kay sing, Justin and Tommy sing also" we would diagram this as

K------> J and T (with a split arrow)

My question is, if we are doing a logical reasoning problem, and say an answer choice draws a conclusion that Kay doesn't sing...in order to prove that Kay in fact doesn't sing (i.e. deny the sufficient) we need to also deny the necessary in order for the sufficient to be denied. My question is, if ONE of the conditions in the necessary if failed (Justin not singing for example) is that enough to then contrapose back and say that Kay didn't sing? Or do both conditions (Justin and Tommy not singing) need to be failed?

Similarly, if we have the statement "If Kay sings, Justin or Tommy sing also" and we conclude again that Kay doesn't sing, in order to prove that would be need BOTH Justin and Tommy not to sing, or is it enough for just one of them not to sing, in order to say that Kay didn't?

I hope that makes sense! I believe I know what the answers to these questions are but I just wanted to see if anyone could provide me with an additional explanation !

Does anyone know where to find a list/have a list of logic games with substitution/equivalence questions? Thanks a ton!

Hi, I am facing difficulty in a particular type of Logical Reasoning question which asks to identify the correct inference of a passage and where one of the answer choices is a conclusion.I have a confusion to identify which one is a conclusion and which one is an inference. Can anyone explain what is the difference between Inference and Conclusion?

Hi all!

So I've been drilling LG for a while now and I figured I would start a thread where people can post little 'tricks' or things the LSAT commonly puts on LG that you can look out for/practice getting into the habit of. This is probably more for people who have been struggling with LG like I have~

Oftentimes I missed these inferences or tricks, or just didn't even think to look out for them, but with practice, time and noticing the patterns, I have been getting a lot better!! I had a lot more written down but I lost the sheet lol so hopefully I can add more when I find it.

Here are some of the things I've written down:

• When making inferences in in/out games, take note of the inferences that can be made from distributions as well, not just the stated rules; i.e. the gemstone game (https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-33-section-4-game-3/) where it says 6 in, 4 out; you are able to make a lot of inferences from this later on in the game

• Check to see if an introduced rule would not only trigger in-game inferences but would trigger a new, unspoken rule (i.e. in the gemstone game, 2S -> 1R paired with the distribution allows us to trigger a new rule 2S -> 3T)

• Always look for not both & or rules in in/out games, makes inferences a lot easier

• In sequencing games, block sequences i.e. [MKM] will likely only have a few places they can safely go, and will often trigger an inference or the ability to split the game board up so look out for how they will affect your setup

Some of the game setups I have come across often are:

• Circular (misc)

• Sequencing or double layered or triple layered sequencing

• In/out game

• In/out game with categories (i.e. selecting 'in' from multiple groups)

• Chart games (often a good setup for when the game pieces can choose multiple variables i.e. the showroom & cars game https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-35-section-3-game-2/)

• Grouping games

Please share things you have noticed or would find helpful for others!! :)

Hello, I have been studying for about 3 weeks now, and in both the reading comp and the LG I average in the 20s correct. My problem is the Logical Reasoning, which is literally half the test i average 16-18 correct when I take it. My goal is to get at least a 168 on this test, so my LR needs to be in the 20's per section. I am half way through the LR bible from powerscore and also doing the 7 sage course. Any suggestions how i can increase my LR to getting it into the 20s? Please help!! Thank you very much! I have been studying more than 9 hours a day!!!

I'm 70% complete with the CC and on the LG section. Should I use these lessons to just learn Logic Games or should I start fool proofing the practice problems JY has listed in the lessons now? For some reason I got the impression that Fool Proofing should be saved for after the CC is completed and when you start PT-ing...

For example,

PT 43 S2 Q10

I am trying to examine the stimulus with only logic and try to make sense of AC A.

Acceptance of criticism requires positive response.

A -> PS

Students are more likely to learn from criticism that they are more likely to respond positively. (I paraphrased it)

More likely PS --> More likely to L

SO, can I infer from the above that students are more likely to accept criticism only when students are more likely to respond positively?

More likely A --> More likely PS

becasue

A-->More likely A. One will accept that one criticism only when one is likely to accept that one criticism.

Assuming that one is logical and not some kind of robot programed with random allgorithem.

The same goes with PS. PS --> More likely PS. One will respond positively to the criticism only when one is likely to respond positively to the criticism.

If we chain up the inferrences, we get

A-->More likely A --> PS--> More likely PS--> More likely to L.

And because of the inferrences made above, we can say that one is more likely to learn from criticism when they are more likely to accept the criticism.

A) Students are more likely to learn from crticism that they accept than from crticism they do not accept.

Paraphrase: If one accept a criticism, then one is more likely to learn from it.

A--> More likely to L

if we negate this, then A--> NOT more likely to L. It will contradict with our argument. Therefore, this assumption is necessary.

Another NA I can think of is A->L. When one accept the criticism, one will learn from the criticism.

Please correct me because I am 80% not confident with what I wrote here.

Ok, so I got this MBT question wrong. I initially was going to go with AC D (the right choice) but was turned off from the second part of the answer. The whole thing reads:

"More money is spent on microwave food products that take three minutes or less to cook than on microwave food products that take longer to cook.

The bold I take issue with. I get the first part was referring to microwave popcorn, but do we know that everything else that is microwaved is cooked longer? It doesn't say that in the passage; it just says other microwavable foods when referring to the other half of the market. The only other reference to cook time mentioned is conventionally cooked popcorn.

I fell for C and stretched the word "volume" and linked it to "popularity", but A, B and E are flat wrong.

Thoughts on D?

Admin edit: title

Hi,

I've seen many posts about skipping and pacing strategy, especially those where ppl say they skip and fix their mistakes in the last 10 min in any LR section. But I've also heard some ppl only give themselves 30 min per section to mimic the test day anxiety.

But should I rather give myself full 35 min, instead of 30min, if I am trying to practice the skipping and fixing strategy?

What do you guys think?

Still having a hard time nailing the MBT, SA and PSA questions because I think I'm still struggling to understand the concept of valid and invalid arguments. Wondering if anyone is willing to teach me via call because I feel like I would learn better that way...

I watched a explanation video but I still have few questions about this game. I have questions for #9 and #10.

For #9, I was choosing between A and B

For #10, I was choosing between C and E

Can somebody explain to me why some of the answer choices violate the rule? Most answer choice were incorrect because it leads to a violation of the RF block. But if you place it right, you can also avoid the RF block.

For example, #9 A. 1 on both J and 4 on F and H. I

I placed it like this below:

J F H R

J F R H

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-46-section-4-game-2/

Hello, :D

I am in the process of foolproofing LG and I am improving. However, I do find that I am making reading errors. I guess the easy answer is to read carefully, but did anyone have this problem and have a strategy/tip to improve? Thanks.

Are they on modern tests? I did just fine with them in the CC, and frankly find them to be not-so-challenging, however I'm not familiar with them in the prep tests I've taken. Which is only a handful, prior to starting the CC. Just curious.