"All that is needed to save the koala is to stop deforestation"...

How would you write it as conditionality?

.

SAVE KOALA --> DEFORESTATION......? (Since ALL indicates sufficiency whereas IS indicates necessity)

.

.

I am getting confused because of this LR question where I need to pick an answer choice that contradicts the statement written above. The correct answer is "deforestation is stopped and the koala becomes extinct", which is not a negation but a contrapositive of "SAVE KOALA --> DEFORESTATION". How can it be a contradiction when it is just a mere restatement of the stimulus?

.

This is from PT2.S2.Q11

.

Thank you in advance

Can i get anyones take on this one, i dont really understand the argument, or the flaw

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-61-section-4-question-24/

The definition of an intermediate conclusion is that it supports another sentence, at the same time it's being supported by another sentence.

But when I came across "PT70 - 1LR - Q17", I realized the difference between "cause and effect" and "premise and conclusion" can be quite subtle

Here's my question.

(1) A causes B,

(2) B causes C,

(3) C causes D.

Therefore, A causes D

Here, "B causes C" seems to be an intermediate cause between "A causes D".

Does it make (2) an intermediate conclusion? because it's supported by another sentence?

Just want some clarification because I think the different between Causation and Argument seem to be overlapping.

Like if say:

Because A, therefore B--- (That would be an Argument)

But if we say

B happens because of A--- (That seem to be both a Causation, and an Argument?)

Any thoughts?

Hi All,

So I have a bit of a problem. I have some natural ability, but I have a tendency to cram. I did all of the 7sage curriculum in a month and a half before the September test and was scoring in my PTs around 169-172. I then got a 167 on the September LSAT. I ran out of time for LG, which I'm not too surprised about, but am now gearing up for a December (or February/June) retake.

These questions are about LR/RC because in LG when I do something wrong I know exactly what and why but I can not for the life of me figure out the same for RC/LR:

I am wondering if it is useful to go through the curriculum again and if you do, how the many lessons stick in your head and solidify as testing strategies for later use? For example, I was horrible at strengthen questions, did the strengthen part of the curriculum, ended up getting those practice questions right, but then forgetting how to do strengthen questions on a PT because I can't hold all of that info together at once. How do you retain all of it or imbed the skills so you can keep them all in mind for a test? Flashcards? I took notes on each question type and how to solve but it didn't help and reading those notes again was like reading something out of context, and of course I can't just re-do the entire curriculum before every test.

I also found that even if I understood JY's explanations and how to solve for a certain problem, I still get it wrong. Does that mean I'm missing some integral link/understanding? How do I fix this? I will get his explanations perfectly and see exactly why he came to an answer in his sample Q but not be able to mirror that. Conversely, even when something is explained, I can't understand why the correct answer is correct still.

Sorry for the long post, I guess it's an awkward point to proceed when you've done something and now need to re-do it but better?

Also, for all of those with the Trainer, did you do his book before JY's curriculum? After? Or during (and if so, how?)

Thank you so much in advance !!!!

So we are around 7 weeks out from the December Test. I have the premium package on 7sage and I am wondering if it is worth it at this point to upgrade to Ultimate+. I completed the CC like 5 weeks ago and do return to it frequently.

I am currently missing around 10-13 on LR for both sections. Normally what happens is I go -3/4 on one section and around -7/8 on the other, not sure why but it is pretty consistent. While there is some randomness to the types of questions I'm getting wrong, there are definitely patterns as well. I consistently miss at least a couple SA or NA questions and also seem to struggle with flaw and parallel argument questions. Obviously it affects my test performance as I miss the question, but what's worse is that when I arrive at one of these types of questions on a PT I immediately think "oh no" because I'm worried I'll get it wrong. I then spend far too long on these questions, which sucks because when I BR I realize some of them are actually quite easy (rated around 2 or 3 difficulty stars). So obviously this lack of confidence is affecting me.

I've stopped PTing because it seems ineffective at the moment. I would like to drill LR questions by type. I've looked back to the CC several times at this point to review my trouble areas, so the questions in those problem sets are really familiar to me now. I also obviously have access to the questions I've missed in past PTs (I've taken about 8) and can sort by type using the analytics feature but I would like more.

Does this basically require me to get the Ultimate + ? I now wish I had just gotten it from the beginning, but when I initially began the 7sage curriculum only a month or so before the September test (woooo for underestimating the difficulty of this exam...) I knew I wouldn't have time to complete the ult+ package.

Another thing is that except for the LSAT I sat for in September, I have only taken rather "old" PTs. I know the difference is minimal, but I was also wondering if I should familiarize myself with newer tests, which are available in Ultimate +.

WHY is this post so long, what happened to my ability to be succinct.

TLDR: Is it worth upgrading to Ult+ with only 7 weeks to go mainly for additional LR problem sets?

Can someone verify whether my conditional diagraming of the statement and its negation are correct? I get confused...

Not all hierarchical organizations operate in the same way: HO -> /Operate same way

Negation: HO -> Operate same way

Thank you in advance! :D

Hey all,

So I realize J.Y's general rule for when to use a chart vs. when to use a standard grouping game board is that if the variables are only used once (are exhaustible) than use the regular grouping game board, and if the variables can be used more than once (inexhaustible) then use the chart. This generally works, but I find there are exceptions to this rule on certain games.

One example is game 3 in the C2 test. It's the game where you have to design three tricolor costumes, but the colors can be used more than once.

For this one, I found the standard grouping game set up way more helpful than a chart, and I noticed that J.Y also uses a standard grouping board.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-c2-section-1-game-3/

I'm wondering if there is something about the game that makes it unique that I'm just not seeing?

Would really appreciate any insight as when to use chart vs. grouping is one of the only areas left I still feel a little unsure on.

thanks!

I did my first fully timed LR section today since the Sept test. I created a simplified skipping strategy...basically there were ones I knew and ones that confused me. I skipped the ones that confused me as soon as I realized I was spinning my wheels (total 4 questions). I finished the section in 25:43 (okay so sue me it's not exactly 25/25) which gave me AMPLE time to go back and address the ones I was confused on. I was able to tackle one of the 4 no problem but the other three still gave me pause. After struggling with them for roughly 10min or so I finished up and graded the section. -2 total.

My question is when you go back to the questions you skipped over in the initial 25 in 25 phase (had a rough answer but were not 100% on) how do you approach which ones you tackle first? I kind of skipped back and forth between all 4 because I was too scared to get entrenched in one and run out of time for the other 3.

Is there a method to identify which problems I should address first? Should I just go in order until I solve them and keep E bubbled for the rest if I don't get to them?

Hi, all. I'm curious to get your input about how you evaluate answer choices (ACs) on LR. Specifically, comparing the pros/cons of the two strategies below. If you're a "Sage" or have strong feelings on this topic, then I'm especially interested in hearing from you.

(1) Top-to-Bottom: Regardless of question type, start with reading A, decide to eliminate or keep, then repeat D-E. Finally, after process of elimination, selecting the best one among the remaining ACs.

(2) Scan-and-Select: Depending on question type, scan the ACs for what you think might be the correct one, read and evaluate, then repeat for the remaining ACs, always going from "most likely" to be correct to "least likely".

Of course, I have my own thoughts on both approaches, but for validity's sake, I don't want to bias your opinions one way or another. Here are some more factors to consider, as well:

So, what do you all think? Do you use one strategy over another? Do you use both, but under different conditions? Thanks in advance for anyone who has something helpful to contribute.

Goal: To further refine my process of elimination (P.O.E.) and answering skills for LR by building a crowd-sourced taxonomy of techniques.

How you can help me (and all other 7Sages): Contribute your favorite(s) below. Be sure to mention...

Here are two examples:

EXAMPLE A:

EXAMPLE B:

The more people that reply, the better we'll all get!

So I took an online Powerscore course from August to September in prep for the December course. Since taking the course, I've decided to push back my test date to February. I've also been foolproofing the LGs from PT 1-35 and and working on LR/LG sections. LG-taking a while but slowly seeing improvement. LR struggling much more than I want to... I inputted the past 11 PTS I've done into analytics and I'm avging -6. My analytics tells me I need to brush up on weaken/strengthen, flaw and assumption questions. I'm at this point where I'm struggling to figure out whether I should enroll in a 7sage minimum course to have access to the core curriculum re LR. Problem is I don't know how different it is from PS's curriculum seeing that I've looked at some excerpts on the 7sage blog. Is it worth it to spend more money? Or will the real improvement come from doing more PTs and BRs?

Would appreciate any and all help. Also would appreciate any tips on how others have made major improvements in LR.

Is there any particular reason why the games chosen for the CC are chosen?

Purely after finishing the LR core curriculum? then after that how much after drilling?

Hi guys, I havent gone through the LR curriculum in over a year. I am wondering which lessons cover some, most, few statements, and LR diagramming. I think MBT questions and SA had some?

what’s the difference?

Just did an RC drill of PT 53.

Actually not bad considering RC is my most least practiced section. 20/27.

Stats were:

-5 Infer questions

-2 Application questions

Majority were in the final section. I wouldn't attribute it to rushing because I had a good 12.30ish minutes to complete the final reading section alone, so I felt decent on time. The questions themselves were quite difficult. I also feel like application questions have a dimension similar to inference questions in that you aren't directly finding concrete reference to the passage, and if you are, then it's not as explicit as you wish it to be.

How do you generally approach inference questions? Some tips would be lovely.

Thx

Okay so I've asked about this before and worked on it a little bit but these questions continue to bite me in the ass. I have a really hard time figuring out the authors attitude and what they would agree with in R.C.

How can I practice this? Should I look for indications in the writing? Should I practice making special note of areas where it looks like the author is revealing how they feel? Even if I find how they feel how the hell am I suppose to know what they'd be likely to agree with? What mindset should I have for these questions?

Basically...help...haha

I completely forget where the lesson is that outlines how to deny a conditional statement. Any help?

So I took the LSAT in Sept (posted a similar discussion before) got a 157 and this past weekend I took a new diag without studying for 3 weeks and got a whopping 160! Which...I mean I'm glad but still wish I at least got that on the real one. Obviously I hope to move past 160 in Dec but I'm truly at a loss on how to study right now. I have the starter program with 7sage but I can see that I still have timing issues with LG and RC. On the real one I did terribly on RC. I can still polish my LR but I don't know if I should start from Square 1 or ... what. Please help! I posted a help discussion before but got no replies and also didn't have a new diag score then. Thanks!

Hey, guys! Does anyone find strengthen questions harder than weaken questions? I'm not really sure if you should find one easier than the other but for some reason my brain says that strengthen should be easier than weaken. I get the task for strengthen questions but for some reason I'm having a harder time with strengthen than weaken questions.

On the December dates & deadlines page it says that the test will be administered on December 2, and the score release date will be January 4. That's almost five weeks...I thought that it's supposed to be three. Am I missing something?

https://www.lsac.org/jd/lsat/test-dates-deadlines/2017-2018/us-canada-dec

This was just an incredibly difficult game for me. I had such a difficult time with it. What about you guys?

I was wondering if anyone has encountered a similar LG to PT34.S4.G2? It's the game that talks about different lectures/ speakers/ philosophers... The wording of that game really threw me off the first time. I wanted to get practice with other confusingly worded questions like that one.

Would appreciate any help team!

Hello sagers,

I want to make sure my application is perfect and idk if it would be a good idea to , I guess, pay someone to help me make sure it's solid, that I'm applying at the correct time and all, or if I need to retake, etc. Does 7sage offer these services? If not, is it against the rules here to offer to pay someone who is experienced to help?

My GPA is a 3.25, LSAT is a 169 (third take). I want a shot at USC UCLA and UCI (last choice). I was thinking I either apply now to all, or apply to UCI and retake for the others.

Thanks

I'm having a hard time understanding how this answer choice follows logically from the premises.