Hi,

I was wondering if someone could help clarify something for me. When you see this particular question stem, "reasoning is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it presumes," do you think of trying to find an assumption or just to identify the flaw. Any suggestions for eliminating answer choices for these flaw questions that are more subtle?

Thank you!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-18-section-4-question-16/

Strengthen Question

I was able to get this one correct by eliminating wrong choices, but I have a question regarding the answer choice (C).

(C) says when two methods provide the same type of information, the more intrusive one shouldn't be used.

From Dr. K's argument, we know that electronic fetal monitors (EFM) "do no more" to increase the chances that a baby will be born in good health than ordinary stethoscopes, but does this mean EFM and ordinary stethoscopes provide the same kind of info?

From Dr. A's argument, we know that Dr. K does acknowledge that both methods provide the same information, but can we use our knowledge we get from Dr. A's argument to strengthen Dr. K's argument?

Relative v. absolute

A is faster than B, therefore A is fast. Well, not necessarily. A is faster than B in relative terms. It doesn’t imply that A is fast in absolute terms. For example, we know that the conclusion in this statement is not true: “Hippopotamuses are smaller than an elephants. Therefore, hippopotamuses are small.” Or take this statement: “Turtles are faster than ants. Therefore, turtles are fast.”

Can someone please explain this?

Any ETA on the LG drill packets? I really wanna get started on them. Sorry, meant to say ETA on their organization.

Which type of questions in the logical reasoning section require the use of Suf/Nec and their negation? I have a good idea of how this works, I understand when/where it applies in LG, but I have no clue when to use this in LR. Sometimes I'll see an indicator and it doesn't seem to affect the question at all. Other time's I feel I miss them completely. What are the common question types that require us to map these out in the x_ ---> y fashion? What do the question stems look like?

What are some of your strategies to get excited for this section?

I enjoy the process of studying for LR and RC, but not LG.

I think I naturally enjoy anything that has to do with literary comprehension, but LG reminds me too much of algebra and math, which I've hated all throughout my life.. haha

I also think a part of it is my pride: I've excelled in humanities but not really in math, relatively speaking. So I would work extra hard, if need be, to maintain my self identity that I am good at critical reading. With LG, I have no such existential motivation.

any way to change this preconceived notion?

When I open up the page to fool-proof for LG, I think ... "Uh....it's that time again..."

Any tips?

Okay, I can't get logic for the life of me lol!

One cannot prepare a good meal (GM) from bad food (/F),

GM --> F (my answer. "/F" is negated because of the word "cannot").

GM --> Not /F (official answer).

Produce good food (F) from bad soil (/S)

F --> S (my answer I negated "S" because of the word "cannot" which is connected to the necessary from the first sentence).

F --> Not /F (official answer. Where the hell did "/F" come from?).

Maintain good soil (S) without good farming (Farm),

/S --> /Farm (my answer. I negated "S" because of the word "without," and negated "Farm" because of the word "cannot" which is connected to the necessary from the first sentence).

S --> Farm (official answer).

Or have good farming (Farm) without a culture that places value on the proper maintenance of all its natural resources so that needed supplies are always available (Maintenance).

/Farm --> /Maintenance (my answer. I negated "Farm" because of the word "without", and negated "Maintenance" because of the word "cannot" which is connected to the necessary from the first sentence).

Farm --> Maintenance (official answer).

Take a look at my translation from English to conditional logic symbols. What's my problem, and what am I doing wrong!?!??!!

I totally suck at translating English into conditional logic symbols. I've got some good advice from 7Sagers, but any more advice on how to improve translating English into conditional logic symbols?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-37-section-2-question-12/

"The only songs A has written are B songs and PR songs"

(PT73.S4.21. https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-73-section-4-question-21/)

I translated the sentence as:

A --> B

A --> PR

(A --> B and PR)

But then I realized it has to be "a song A has written has to be B or PR".

A --> B or PR

I was able to pick the correct answer choice for this question, but I don't know which is the right translation.

Any help will be appreciated! :)

This guy JY shifts from a correct CBT answer choice to a MBT answer choice in the question straight after. I understand why some of the elements might be fixed in certain positions for the GLQ arrangement on Team 1 in Q23, but wouldn't you have to test all of them to make sure they must be true?

Sure, for Q24, G & K are positioned in the same way as they are for the correct answer on Q23 (E: L and Q). I get that. How would you know that every other element in that setup must be true? I could understand one noticing one as you're going through the setup on Q23 but this approach doesn't seem like it would hold true in all scenarios.

I understand why the answer is right, but this approach just seems a little sketchy. I don't know how you can say something that could be true also must be true. You would have to test it to make sure unless you knew from the setup.

Many logic games utilize alphabet orders to differentiate a variable set (ex) say, variable set 1 consists of JKLM and 2, NOP...etc) but I often confuse which alphabet belongs to which variable set. For example, when I think of the variable N, I have to look back and forth my main diagram and the variable to see where N belongs. This is an incredible waste of time.

I am trying to memorize the alphabetical order so well to the point that, when I see a variable, I know exactly where in the variable set it belongs. To add to my dismay, I've learned Russian in college, and I sometimes confuse Russian with English alphabet. For example, in Russian, "r" is pronounced similarly to "g." Sometimes, without even being aware of it, I would write down g in the main diagram instead of r...

Anyways, does anyone have tips for quickly categorizing and memorizing which alphabet belongs to which variable set? (other than memorizing the alphabetical order again)

Is there a LG bundle on the site somewhere for the newer tests (say, tests 59+) that we can print like the 1-35 LG bundle?

Hi! for each question ill use a pencil and factor in what each question wants me to into the diagram and then erase and move on to the next problem but I feel as though that is wasting a lot of time but Im having trouble with visually placing the new information in or figuring out the questions alone without diagramming them, does anyone have any advice to get rid of the penciling in factor? Thank you so much in advance!!!!

Hello:

During blind review, I find myself getting the correct answer on many "difficult" questions because I moved on when I found what I figured out to be the right answer. This technique has helped me go past questions that aren't that difficult but do present with well written wrong answers. Any thoughts from the community?

Hi everyone! I have been studying via the 7sage syllabus for almost three months now and I absolutely love it. However, I find that I am struggling more with the logic games now than I did in my first test. (like I scored 60% correct on my first test and now I am scoring 25-30% correct).

Has this occurred to anyone? Is this common? I am wondering if I am getting too caught up on what is the appropriate method to solve the game rather than before I was just doing my best to solve? Any help would be greatly appreciated. I have been printing copies and practicing the problems on repeat like JY suggested; however once I get to different types of mixed problems I panic and freeze and get in my head.

Any advise is greatly appreciated. I want to avoid getting negative on these - at first I was really hopeful I could master them and now I am beginning to doubt myself.

How do we tell the difference between an inclusive 'or' (group 3 rules) or an exclusive 'or' (can be negated to mean 'and')?

Hi All,

This question gave me some issues during my timed take and BR. I'm hoping to talk through it and get someone else's perspective.

We are given a set of facts and we are asked which one of the ACs can be properly inferred.

So, if the scientists are correct, we have this chain of events here:

Air pollution caused global warming, which enhanced the strength of El Nino which caused the widespread drought, which made the tropics especially susceptible to fires.

I don't have an issue with eliminating A, B and C.

D gave me a bit of an issue though. Is D incorrect because it specifies "size and intensity" rather than mere occurrence? For example, if D said "At least some scientists believe that air pollution was responsible for the susceptibility of the tropics to fires in 1997," would that be correct? Or is there something else I am missing here?

I also considered the possibility that D could be wrong because D prescribes a believe to a group of people (some scientists) that might not have been something they were even aware about. For example, the stimulus states a belief of many scientists that have to do with El Nino, global warming and air pollution, NOT the fires. The fire in the tropics is a separate occurrence that the scientists may or may not be aware of. So, due to the mere lack of knowledge, the scientists could believe that air pollution was responsible for the strength of El Nino, but because we do not know the extent of the scientists' awareness of the fires, we cannot infer that they would have any beliefs about the fires. Belief presupposes knowledge of the subject of that belief, right? So it could be the case that, if the scientists were aware of the fires that they would infer a causal relationship, but we are not told that they are aware.

I can't tell if this is me taking this question wayyyy too far and overthinking it, but I would love to know what anyone else's grounds are for eliminating D.

Thanks in advance!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-69-section-4-question-20/

Hello gamers,

I seem to always get stuck on sequencing games where one of the rules involves having "at least two spaces between X and Y". I get particularly stuck when there's a switch on top so it can either be X _ _ Y or Y _ _ X. Furthermore, sometimes I skip over the "at least" part, which ensures other issues... I know this uses the same concepts as all other games, but for some reason this kind of rule always takes me longer to get my head around. Does anyone else have this issue?

As for improving time, anyone know of certain games with this quality? I want to do as many as possible so I can get more comfortable.

Thanks!

Sophia

Im slightly confused by this question. It says that taking 'no headache pill stops pain more quickly' so why wouldn't the answer be B? Unless it is referring to one person taking different types of pills and comparing its effect, Danaxil would most quickly resolve a persons headache. However, we might not be able to compare between two people? Am I on the right track?

Your help is much appreciated :)

The answer for this question is E. I don't think any of the answers really have a logic structure that parallels to that of the stimulus. For the stimulus I got:

CA--> P

CA some MR

therefore, P some MR

For E I got:

SP some TP

SO some TP

therefore SO --> SP

I won't exactly say they are parallel, though E is the closest answer I guess.

Any thoughts on this?

Hello, could anyone explain to me why the answer is B and not A. Isn't the argument centred around reduction in capital gains tax and how they would lead to increase in deficit?

I still don't understand this question, I chose A but the right answer is B. Why is it B, since it does not mention anything about persons?

I am retaking for june to get off the waitlist at WashU and wanted to see if anyone in Dallas wanted to get together to study.

On PT 35 S1 Q15,

Conclusion: We should be skeptical about the magazine’s conclusion.

Premise: The sample is unrepresentative and the question is biased

answer choice B contains Most (the conclusion drawn in most magazine surveys have eventually been disproved.) and JY shared that it provides little bit of support to the argument.

my question is,

is it always safe to assume that MOST provides little bit of support for strengthening question?

how about for SOME?

Hi everyone. I'm having trouble following the rules to translate a sentence with a group 3 indicator. The lesson states that it doesn't matter which term you put as the sufficient condition at first, as the result will be the same - you negate one of the terms, and then create the counter-positive. I keep seeing 4 possible outcomes. Here's what I mean.

If you have the sentence: There is no reward without hard work.

"no reward" is /R; "hard work" is HW

Let's say we choose /R as the sufficient condition:

/R --> HW

To negate, you could either do:

/R --> /HW OR R --> HW (negate the "no reward")

That gives us the counter positives: HW --> R and /HW --> /R (If there is hard work, then there is a reward. If there is no hard work, then there is no reward)

Lets say you choose HW as the sufficient condition:

HW --> /R

To negate, you could either do:

/HW --> /R OR HW --> R

That gives counter positives: R --> HW and /R -- /HW (If there is a reward, then there is hard work. If there is no reward, there is no hard work)

Any suggestions for someone struggling with the required intuition to crack this?

Hello 7sagers,

I am thinking of doing free reading comprehension tutoring by using passages from older practice tests. Let me know if any one of you is interested in joining me.

I do want to put it out there that I am doing this primarily for my own good because RC happens to be my weakest section. My average for LR is -1.5 but RC is -5 at the moment. So I need to focus on that and one really good way to improve on RC is to go over it with someone.

So if you are struggling with RC and would like to work on this with me, I would be happy to help. But if you are doing well on RC and would still like to just work on it with me let me know as well. I think either way this could be helpful to everyone who just wants to work on improving their reading comprehension skills.

So yes : ) Let's tackle RC!

Update:

Hey everyone,

So I think the best way to proceed would be to just meet and do a passage together. We can rotate volunteers when we go to the next paragraph and then we can all do the questions together under time constraint. So with that said, I have set the tutoring time to be Sunday, May 7th at 5:00 p.m. (eastern time).

We will be using the Reading Comprehension section from PT #3. So please have a clean printed copy of the RC section in front of you and be ready to work on it as we go along. To get the most out of this session, please do not do the passages before the meeting. I think the best way to do this would be to work on this together.

If you would like to join me on Sunday simply click the link provided below at that time and hopefully I will see you all there : ).

P.S. for people who cannot make it at this time. Please let me know what day and time does work for you. I'll do my best to accommodate you guys the next time : )

Decoding Reading Comprehension with Sami

Sun, May 7, 2017 5:00 PM - 6:30 PM EDT

Please join my meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone.

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/863069925

You can also dial in using your phone.

United States: +1 (646) 749-3122

Access Code: 863-069-925

First GoToMeeting? Try a test session: http://help.citrix.com/getready