HI Folks!

I am looking for the previous post(s) that had a compilation of the hardest passages.

I am especially looking for hardest RC and LR.

Thanks a lot!

hi everyone,

for those of you using the trainer and 7sage together, i was wondering what you thought of learning/using the "complex or rules drill" (pg 196)? I don't really remember having learned something like this in the 7sage curriculum (correct me if I'm wrong) and I'm kind of feeling that it might just confuse me. Is the alternative making more sub gameboards?

Help would be much appreciated. Thanks! Trying to pick out of this book what works/doesn't work with 7sage, and I've found the LR to be pretty good.

Hi everyone, I'm taking the October test and needed some advice on if i should be doing the PT's in numerical order or if I should jump to the later years? I've read in some of the discussion forums that the later PTs are harder. Do you think I should just keep continuing in order or make the jump to the late 50s or 60s?

Can someone explain 29/4/5? (B) seems like it has the relationship backwards. In order for it to be the correct answer, shouldn’t it say that mainstream opinions are generally in the bland and innocuous ones? Because the other way around tells me nothing of what the mainstream opinion is likely composed. For all we know, the mainstream opinion is mostly composed of striking, insidious views. This is consistent with bland and innocuous opinions being generally in the mainstream– these opinions may compose a very small portion of the mainstream opinion.

Even with the negation test, I cannot understand this answer. So what if bland, innocuous opinions are NOT generally in the mainstream? What if they are generally in the violent anarchist view? That tells me nothing about how much of the mainstream is composed of bland and innocuous opinions. It could still be the case that mainstream opinions are composed ENTIRELY of bland and innocuous opinions.

I have never felt this frustrated with a questioN!!

I chose (E) because if we negate this, then surely, the argument that the opinions on television are the result of market forces comes into question. Of course, who knows, maybe the executives’ opinions just happen to be reflected in market-directed opinions, but considering how much weaker (B) is, I chose (E).

What am I doing wrong?

Hi everybody,

I am in desperate need of help with the RC section. The interesting thing about my progress is that it is getting continuously worse. Back when I first started reading comprehension passages, I didn't follow a specific method. I just read through the passage, underlined some important things, and moved straight to the questions. I would get between 2 and 3 wrong. I have subsequently tried the Memory Method and another methodology, similar to the Memory Method, but I would add the extra step of quickly skimming over the passage one more time before moving on to the questions. Unfortunately, both methods have not worked so well for me. On RC sections, I can get anywhere from 5 to 9 wrong.

I am not sure what is wrong, perhaps it is burnout or simply a loss of confidence, but no matter which of these three methods I try now, I end up doing poorly. Time is also an issue for me; I am a rather slow reader and it takes some time for me to process the ideas, especially in the times when my mind is not focusing optimally.

If anybody has been in a similar situation and has found a way out, or if you can offer any specific advice, I would really really appreciate it. The October LSAT is coming so fast, and I am in great need of finding the best method for me, even if it doesn't guarantee a perfect score on the RC section.

Thanks!

-Nastassia

I continue to BR PT 39, and I got my ass handed to me on this one (seriously, did other people think PT 39 was much harder than 38)? I BR'd 9 points lower on this exam compared to PT 38, and I used a blank exam to BR.

Anyway, I don't understand at all how A is the correct answer for this one. I picked E (during the exam and during BR), and here was my reasoning (this is from my comment on the video):

I don’t understand question 25 at all. In line 3, it states that Internet users believe that access to information should be free. How would charging people for information (answer choice A) be a compromise? This seems to go against the core principle of the Internet users as established in the passage. Also, wouldn’t charging people further promote the idea that the information is a commodity (line 60)? To me, this answer choice is no compromise, but a full rejection of the Internet community and full acceptance of the publishing community's ideals.

Additionally, how is E not a better answer choice? Research is already exempted under the current laws, so current copyright holders are presumably familiar with this idea. Also, this keeps with the tradition of the free access to information. Yes, the free information wouldn’t be to everyone (only those conducting research), but it’s a compromise! I fail to see how A works at all, let alone is better than this answer. It seems to me that both sides would agree to this.

Man, I got murdered on this PT (after completely destroying PT 38). I thought the RC and LR were nightmares on this PT. Anyway, I cannot figure out how C is better than A for this question. Here is my reasoning for this question:

This is a flaw/descriptive weaken question (specifically in S's argument).

R: If you are more diverse in experience, then the more you will understand the need for compromise. Therefore, to become a politician, a person should have a diversity of experience.

S: To be worthy of public trust, it's not enough to only have diverse experience. Such a person wouldn't necessarily be worthy of public trust.

What I am looking for: I know we only want S's flaw, but R is missing the link between compromise and becoming a politician. For S, she doesn't actually say anything. She pretty much goes "no, diverse experience isn't enough because it isn't enough." S also equivocates "becoming a politician" with "worthiness of public trust."

Answer A: How is this not it? S gives an opposite point of view (you don't need a diversity of experience) and she gives no reason for it (S gives absolutely no evidence; in my mind, S's second sentence is completely redundant of the first).

Answer B: S never talks about what is beneficial.

Answer C: How is possibly the credited answer? Yes, S attributes a view to R ("as you suggest"), but how is the second part of this answer choice correct? Where does S explicitly or implicitly say that the view is more vulnerable than what is actually expressed? I don't see anywhere where S remotely says something like "R, your belief about diverse experience is very vulnerable to critics."

Answer D: Personal vs. relevant? S doesn't mention this.

Answer E: Flexibility? S doesn't talk about this. Also, S doesn't actually talk about politics, only "worthiness of public trust."

Help much appreciated.

I couldn't pick between A and D and finally chose A. But the answer is D.

I kept trying to find out why A is wrong, but I still don't understand why A can't be an answer.

If A is an assumption, I think it all makes sense at all just like D.

Why A is wrong and D should be an answer?

Please someone explain me.

Thanks!

I'm having trouble with the following question from Superprep, A:

L: People's intentions cannot be, on the whole, more bad than good. Were we to believe otherwise, we would inevitably cease to trust each other, and no society can survive without mutual trust among its members.

Stem: Most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?

A (correct) - It fails to rule out the possibility that a true belief can have deleterious (harmful) conseuqences

My analysis:

The author claims that if we believe that intentions are more good than bad, we would cease to trust one another and as a result without this mutual trust we would not survive. We are surviving, so we must not have the belief that that intentions are more good than bad.

There is clearly a gap between believing and the truth of a statement, but I cant put my finger on the flaw. I would normally say that the flaw is that just because a belief can't be true, doesn't mean that the underlying element can't be true. This, however, doesn't line up with the flaw stated in A.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-23-section-3-question-06/

I had some reservations in choosing answer choice C. I was able to eliminate all the others so answer choice C seemed most likely to be correct, but I wasn't 100% sure. The reason is that the premise states "The purse of a trader in the city "would probably" have contained a more diverse set of coins." and the C uses more definitive word, "had been brought". I think we don't know for a fact that it 'had been' brought by the pilgrims. It is a speculation. Since it is only a speculation that the purse would probably have contained a more diverse set of coins. I would think the correct answer would say "The purse... was probably brought . . . by a pilgrim."

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-35-section-2-passage-4-passage/

I am a long-time lurker that is gearing up for the October exam.

I really love 7Sage and the Sage community discussion threads. I follow all the threads related to preparation of the exam.

I have a question regarding RC section of PT 35, section 2 passage 4 - Dworkin and Legal Positivism.

How to approach this? How did you go about answering it? Any and all suggestions would be appreciated!!

I went (-2), but found myself struggling with it more than I think I should have. I just wasn't quick or crisp in this passage.

Thanks!

JGirl

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-41-section-1-question-08/

I was trying to find out what's the difference between C and D, but I still don't understand why C can't be an answer.

If there're no predators which pose a danger to the monkeys and attack both from land and the air just like C said, can C be an answer too because it can also explain why the monkeys use different alarm calls?

Why C can't be an answer and D is right?

What's the difference between them?

Please someone explain me.

Thanks!

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-19-section-4-question-09/

While I was solving this, I narrowed the choices to B or D.

B because it provides an alternate explanation for why Uranus is being pulled away;

D because if the Sun exerts less of a pull on Uranus, maybe even the little mass that Neptune and Pluto have can pull Uranus towards them? Hence, an alternative to the existence of another planet.

Please explain to me what the correct thought process for eliminating D is.

Thank you :)

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-20-section-4-question-03/

Hi! Please find below the way I solved the question:

Opponents Conclusion: triple trailer trucks (ttt) are more dangerous than other commercial vehicles

Premise: Where ttt are permitted, for these vehicles the rate of road accident fatalities per mile is lower than the national rate for other commercial vehicles

Conclusion: ttt are safer than other commerical vehicles

A) Irrelevant

B) Provides an alternate explanation for why the rate of accident fatalities is lower, thus, weakens

C) So what if they oppose everything

D) In some way supports our argument as it says they require a special license thus even safer drivers drive ttt

E) Irrelevant fact

Is my trail of thought correct?

Thanks for your help!

http://www.techinsider.io/how-to-solve-einsteins-riddle-video-2015-9

This is the grouping/sequencing combo game from hell. I'm going to try it tonight.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-41-section-3-question-02/

I'm little confused about B.

The stimulus said Samantha likes both oolong and green tea and none of her friends likes both.

Doesn't it mean none of her friends like both oolong and green tea?

Since none of her friends likes oolong and green tea, shouldn't B be Must be false?

How is it possible B is could be true? What am I missing?

And if the stimulus said Samantha likes EITHER oolong OR green tea and none of her friends likes both, can B be Must be false?

Please someone explain me.

Thanks!

Hi everyone,

Just finished the 7sage instruction curriculum. Now onto PTing: for the Dec exam, my plan was to go PT 36-75 every other day, and review some material on the days in between (or look at stuff like Trainer drills/flaw section). My diagnostic was not very high, 148, but I got a 154 the other day (yay for me...) anyways I was wondering if you guys think I should try to start at the lower pts, (before 36) ? I know JY says they're not really a good representation of the current exam but maybe it could help if I start a little lower and did a PT every day? What do you guys think? I'd appreciate the advice. And thanks everyone for the advice you've given so far. As you can tell I'm kind of an LSAT noob.

Question, while you're BRing with Step 2, after initially timing your work in a section, is there a more effective method of writing out the answer choices? Separate colored pen? Directly on the test versus on a separate sheet of paper? Gradually work to just doing them in your head? I understand the process clearly. I would just like to know if theres a methodology you would recommend for the implementation of Step 2. Thanks!

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-59-section-3-question-24/

Answer is E. What does this even mean? :O

E) "presumes,without providing justification, that 18 century European aesthetics is as encompassing as an aesthetic theory can be"

So we are 6 months away and I am registered for the December LSAT. I am about 3 weeks into the 7Sage curriculum and feeling great so far. How is everyone else doing? have you started preparing for December?

Hey Everyone,

I remember someone on TLS who recommended reading Bill Bryson's "A Short History of Nearly Everything" and it was not only fantastic but also helped me get acquainted with different topics in the sciences. Looking for a BOOK suggestion related to humanities/law that I can read in my spare time. Thanks!

Hi JY! I don't quite understand this answer choice as I eliminated option A and B as they mention water levels - which aren't specifically addressed by the passage. Could you please help me out with an explanation for this?

Hi All,

With the October test fast approaching, I've been doing the PTs in the late 60s (think 65-69). Before that I had done every test from 35-55. While these later PTs been in my normal range for the most part (low to mid 160s), the past couple have been awful (158/159-awful in the sense that my scores haven't been this low in a long time).

I've noticed that while I'm able to take my time and understand the questions in BR (last BR I got a 171), I feel rushed and find myself stumbling through the test under timed conditions. This hadn't been such a major problem in the past and I'm not sure what I can do to remain accurate while also maintaining a good pace. During the last PT I took, I actually got distracted during the end of the RC section and had to rush through the last passage :(

Do you think this is just that the PTs are harder or that I'm psyching myself out by thinking that this is what the October test will be like? Is it burnout? What can I do to make sure my score doesn't stay at this level?

Thanks for your help!

I have a question on negation. On prep test 58 section 1 question 25. the line Handmade foundations are never found on wigs that do not use human hair. Is diagrammed as HF------>HH. Shouldn't it be ~HF ------> HH. It is group 4. So you pick an idea ~HH, you negate it ~HH --->HH AND MAKe it necessary. The other idea is the sufficient. So how do we end up with HF INSTEAD OF -HF?

Shouldn't it be

~HF ---> HH?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-58-section-1-question-25/

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-41-section-1-question-09/

Hi, while solving MSS questions, I often confront the situation in which whether I should use logical translation or not.

For example, in this question,

as the passage states "technological improvements will enable food production to increase as population increase," I translate it to TI --> FPI.

Then, according to the statement "increases in food production will be negligible unless societies become more centralized..." I translate it into FPI --> SC.

Thus, I got TI --> FPI --> SC.

This is why I chose the answer choice (E) which I thought as TI --> SC.

Perhaps this type of logical translation might not be appropriate for this question, so could you point out what was a problem in my reasoning and further explain when is the time I should use logical translation or not?

Thanks!