One of the RC passages in Sept. 2009 was about copyright and tangible object theory (TOT). In general, the passage goes like this (working from memory here since it's not with me at the moment but it's been bothering me all day):

P1 - Intro of TOT and the VP of proponents - that copyright and other IP rights apply to tangible objects

P2 - extension of P1, with the intro of retained rights concept

P3 - says that TOT has chief advantage of justifying IP rights "without recourse to the popular but problematic assumption that ideas can be copyrighted" or something like that.

I was very confused by that statement in P3. It reads to me like TOT (which holds that tangible objects can be protected) is justifying IP rights while also NOT being COUNTER to the idea that intangible objects (like ideas) cannot be copyrighted (or protected under IP Law).

Am I going crazy? If someone is familiar with this passage, can you please help me out?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-58-section-2-passage-3-passage/

I am about to start on my PTs but I'm a little hesitant because I am doing so poorly on RC.

I've been studying for this test properly for about a year now, meaning that I've been taking practice tests and blind reviewing them. I've been somewhat familiarizing myself with the LSAT material for about two years now but only last year did I start taking practice LSATs. I've taken 20-30 practice tests until now. I was feeling fairly confident until I took my last three LSATs, which are recent. I scored a 164 on two of them and a 163 on one of them. When I blind reviewed those exams my score went up anywhere from a 170 to a177. I'm aiming for one of the top 20 law schools and, therefore, my score of 164 won't cut it. What do you guys think I should do? and do you think that I could potentially achieve my BR score on a timed LSAT?

Thanks for your feedback.

Hey guys! Can someone please help me with understanding exactly how to do BR for reading comp? It's seems much more intuitive to me how do to BR for LR and LG but not so much for RC. Thanks for your help:)

I do not understand how E can be the correct answer when it violates the rule stating that two students must have the same reviews. If O is given an S, then M must have a T and a U, but cannot have an S due to J having an S. Thus you would get J=S, K=T, L=U, M=U,T, and O=S,U,T. Can someone please help explain why E is the correct answer?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-42-section-1-game-4/

Just realized that LSAC changed my Sept. LSAT test date and location. My new location is Kwun Tong Government Secondary School. And the new date is Sept. 16th, which is 1 day earlier than the original date. Is this an error or a real change? Have to rebook the hotel. However, I haven't receive any email notice about this change from LSAC.

Anyone same as me?

I get why Answer choice D is correct. But I am not wholly convinced why answer choice B is wrong.

Would love any input :)

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-27-section-4-question-07/

This is by far my worse section. I'm currently scoring a 161and missing like 10 questions on RC. Any tips to lower that to at least - 6.

This question gave me a lot of problems. I am still not sure how A described the flaw.

For a correlation to be positive, shouldn’t it be smokers who drink caffeinated beverages are more likely to develop HD as compared to smokers who don’t drink caffeinated beverages.

Like really confused here. Can someone clarify?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-50-section-4-question-19/

I haven't been hitting my target score. I'm a few points away, but I haven't been hitting it.

I signed up for the September LSAT, but now I'm thinking about rescheduling it to December.

I didn't want to do it because I thought maybe that might mean law schools might have already filled up most of their spots by December, so I may have a smaller chance of getting in. Really wanted to start law school next year, and I thought taking in September would be best for timing purposes, but i am not hitting the score I need to hit, so now I'm leaning more towards rescheduling to December. i'm just having a really tough time deciding, so I wanted to get your opinions on this matter.

Thoughts? Advice/suggestions?

Thanks so much.

I am trying to find a good explanation for answer choice A (correct) over answer choice D (incorrect) on PT.73 LR #1 , Q12.

The stimulus states that the chairperson should not have released the report because they did not consult any other members of the commission before the report was released.

Conclusion: Shouldn't have been released

Premise: Didn't consult

So, what we are looking for is: necessary to consult before it is released.

Answer choice A: It would have been permissible for the chairperson to release only if most of the other member had first given consent

Answer choice D : Would have been justifiable to release only if each of the commission members would have agreed to it being released had they been consulted.

I can't clearly articulate why A is superior to D... 9/10 times I think I would still choose D if I saw this question again.

Can anyone help?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-73-section-2-question-12/

From my understanding, RC seems to be subjective. I'm still unsure on which approach to use as all of them give me similar results.

How do you all approach RC? Suppose you have a passage in front of you. Do you refer back to the passage? How long do you usually spend on reading the passage? Do you notate at all? What were your RC scores when you first started and what are they now?

Thanks!

Hey everyone! I'm scheduled to take the Sept. LSAT this Saturday and I am super nervous. I work full time and I plan to apply for the next Fall. I'm at a point right now where I just want a good score to have in my back pocket going into the Dec. LSAT since I probably won't score what I want (170+) this Saturday and I think I will retake in Dec.I don't plan on submitting apps earlier than Jan.

I already cancelled one score from Dec. 2016. Will it be bad if I have two scores and one cancellation? I do really well with BR (173+) but when timed, I score 158,159 etc.

So I don't really understand how printing multiple copies of the same game and being able to do the games from memory helps me. It just feels like artificial point inflation. Can someone explain? Please and thank you.

okay here is what I did. I scored the lowest I've ever scored on an RC section a week ago. I thought well damn the test is a week away I'm fucked. So I thought.. Zack you know how to read what the hell is your issue. Basically beat myself up for a solid day. Then I decided that I'm going to take my time up front reading the passages and have a SOLID grasp on the questions.

I scored the highest I have ever gotten simply by slowing down and fully comprehending the passages, rather than trying to read faster than I was comprehending.

me trying to read....

![Alt Text] (https://media.giphy.com/media/iqMHmcPIsNm4U/giphy.gif)

Can anybody tell me what this answer choice is exactly saying? I just want to know what it's trying to say because I don't think I'm completely understanding it.

It was a flaw in reasoning question (Preptest December 2015, Section 2, LR, Question 18.)

Answer Choice E from this particular question says "makes use of an assumption that one would accept only if one has already accepted the truth of the conclusion."

This may be a dumb question, but I really can't figure out what this answer choice is exactly saying... can someone explain this for me? Thanks so much!

#pleasebeafriend

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-77-section-2-question-18/

Hey everyone,

Good luck to those taking the September exam.

I recently realized that I am severely weak in games that have minimal upfront inferences, require using additional info in the questions, and have more questions that make me try brute forcing through the answer choices. I have 3 questions regarding this type of game:

Any general advice on how to approach these types of games? One problem is that I try to force out an inference (either in the set-up or a particular question), fail to do so, and waste so much time. Yet, this kind of mentality seems to help me when there is actually an inference to be made. Do you have something like a general limit? Like, "if I don't figure out an inference 10 seconds for this question, I am going to brute force it"?

What are some difficult rule-driven/brute-force games that would be good practice?

Is it just me, or do the preptests from 70+ have more of these rule-driven games?

I chose B under timed conditions but switched to A in BR.

My issue with B is that there are no "potential" criminals here. If B said "nothing should be done to protect criminals at the cost of placing restrictions on law-abiding citizens" then it would be airtight. But "potential" doesn't work because if you are found in the prison directory, then you would have been convicted of a crime to be there in the first place.

I chose A in BR because it made the distinction I referred to above, but it doesn't actually connect to our conclusion so it can't be right.

You've got this. Sleep a lot this week, rest on Friday and eat well! Then give it your all. :)

Hi guys,

It's possible that I'm overthinking this seemingly easy question, but I'm having a lot of trouble eliminating D.

My reasoning is that, if D were to be true and drivers are more alert at crosswalks, it wouldn't matter as much if pedestrians are less careful when crossing there. Even if I don't check both ways at the crosswalk, with D the driver's being more careful could offset this. This would directly weaken the argument.

The only thing I can think of is the fact that the answer says "drivers are generally most alert," which could mean that even if they pay the most attention at crosswalks it still isn't enough to offset the pedestrians not paying attention themselves. Maybe a driver's most alert state is still extremely distracted. Is this enough to eliminate this answer choice, or could there be something I'm missing?

Thanks!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-77-section-4-question-19/

Hello. I have some trouble in nailing this question.

(C) How could this strengthen the conclusion? The conclusion is about a causation between oval orbits and close encounter with other planets. But this answer choice is correlation; that is, it says that where planets are orbiting a distant star more than one planet are found near the star. I have learned that generally a mere correlation does not strengthen a causation.

(B) why is this answer choice wrong?

Thanks

Just a heads up-- According to the LSAC's website, the FSU and FGCU testing centers will be closed for the September 16, 2017 test administration date. The LSAC will continue to update its website as it is notified about which centers will be closing.

PSA are just not clicking for me and I feel very uncomfortable answering them even when I get them right. I'm drilling them this afternoon and I had some trouble with this question. Any tips on PSA in general would be great as well as input on this question.

Context:

There is a hypothesis that dreams are produced when the brain erases "parasitic connections" which accumulate during the day and take up space in our brain. Ant-eaters are the only mammals that doesn't have REM (when we humans have our most vivid dreams). The ant-eater has a very large brain in relation to the animal's size.

Conclusion:

This fact (ant-eaters don't REM and have big brains) provides some confirmation for the hypothesis above.

Premise:

The hypothesis predicts that for an animal have an effective memory and not dream, that animal would need extra space in the brain to account for the parasitic connections which aren't erased each night.

What I'm looking for:

Most of this question is context and that made it a little difficult for me to zone in on the conclusion and premise, not to mention it is a pretty wordy stimulus. We need to connect the premise to the conclusion. The ant-eater's anatomy aligns with the hypothesis' prediction and the argument concludes that that provides support for some confirmation of that hypothesis.

Answer Choices:

A) Facts about one species of animal (ant-eaters don't REM and have big brains) can provide confirmation for hypotheses about all species that are similar in relevant ways. I really liked this under timed conditions because it seemed to fit the mold I was looking for. Ant-eaters are mammals (similar in the relevant ways) and the author is using the facts about that animal to provide support for the hypothesis. The issue with this AC is that despite the strong language, it doesn't meet the level of sufficiency needed because it says "can". Well, does it?

B) Strike 1: we only have 1 prediction. Strike 2: how can we know that the majority of predictions is confirmed when we don't enough know how many predictions there are? Eliminate.

C) That's not the method of partial confirmation. Our stimulus provides a little confirmation by fitting the predicted circumstances when the hypothesis is irrelevant. Eliminate.

D) "Partially confirmed"... that's good. And the second half is good as well. The hypothesis itself doesn't explain why ant-eaters wouldn't dream, but its anatomy fits the prediction made about cases that do not fall under the hypothesis. I didn't fully grasp the different between the prediction and the hypothesis under times conditions. And I latched onto A and brought confirmation bias into the remaining AC. Correct.

E) There is only 1 hypothesis. Eliminate.

Quick Question: Is it necessary to read the directions every time you repeat a game during foolproofing? I just do it to simulate everything as it would be in a real exam.

Hi all,

For question 8, I confidently picked answer choice E and was stunned that this was correct. Upon looking into the explanation for this it seems that the line reference was at 47 to 48. While doing this timed, this was the exact line reference that I thought made answer choice E the correct answer (unsupported from the text).

Lines 47 to 48 state that : For drilling deeper wells, OBM is normally used.

I thought answer choice E was too strong as it states "required." Normally just states that it is more generally used, while required states a necessary condition. While a different mud recipe can be used (or may be more preferable) for deep oil wells to that of shallow oil wells, I thought "drilling deep oil wells REQUIRING the use of a different mud recipe than shallow wells" was too strong. Who is to say that there aren't other conditions for a specific deep oil well that makes the mud recipe for shallow wells more preferable for a specific case?

Thank you for your help in advance!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-54-section-1-passage-2-passage/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-54-section-1-passage-2-questions/