210 posts in the last 30 days

Hi all, hope your studies are going well.

Just looking for some tips. I only started studying 2 weeks ago :|

I completed a 1000pg book-LG and a 1000pg book-LR that's it. Also reading The Economist out loud for exercise. I recommend it, some dense articles - different subjects tech/med/politics/economics etc. I performed my first PT 72 and got 140 last week Of course I was only able to complete 1/3 of the questons in allotted time the rest all D's.

- My plan is -

LR

Focus on the question type and practice speed

LG

Practice realizing all available deductions and realizing shortcuts to answer questions, increase speed through repetition and teach my parents different game types over and over and over and over ....

RC

Practice actual PT RC sections, untimed, however speed up constantly until can complete them near 8-9 mins each.

I have another 10 PT to complete 62-71, my plan is to do 5-10 within next two weeks.

My goal is 160.

Any tips or suggestions would really help out.

Best of luck to you. :)

0

If someone can explain to me why B is correct and C is wrong I would be most appreciative. My thought process is below:

Although dissemination of national security and commercial information should be restricted/prohibited (based on the condition), the spread of scientific information should always be allowed.

A) Yes, this country can distinguish potential competitors or enemies based on the stimulus.

B) If technology is restricted, then the general public does not need that information on public policy issues.

C) I said this one was not a necessary assumption because we have no idea about democratic vs. non democratic countries relative proportion of advancement.

D) This has to be true as the stimulus requires a distinction of scientific information vs commercial and national security.

E) This could be true if MNC uses technology but doesn't share it internationally.

PLEASE HELP!!! I really cannot see why C is wrong and B is correct. Thank you in advance.

0

Hey guys,

I've been pting for the last month or so for the December LSAT. I have improved immensely in LG and LR because I feel like I've been blind reviewing this sections pretty effectively. I try to blind review RC as well, but I don't feel like my level of understanding in this section has improved much since I started doing PT's.

Does anyone have any advice on how to get the most out of reviewing RC after a PT?

0

A condition stated is "Within each segment, reports are ordered by length, from longest to shortest." For purposes of my question I'd like to emphasize that this condition, like all LG rules, is an absolute rule that must be followed.

We are given no information about the length relation of T to either of W or I. Despite this:

The correct answer to Q1, the typical "acceptable configuration" question, implies T — W (where "—" is the usual notation indicating relative order). If this is a way of providing more information, i.e., another rule, it is unique in my limited experience.

The correct answers to Q5 and Q6 imply T — I.

How can T — W or T — I be required assumptions to answer correctly without our having any information that would support them?

The explanation for this game does not address my question.

0

Hey everyone! I just wanted some suggestions or techniques for approaching weakening q's. I'm finding that while timing myself, I take a longer time or I rush when solving weakening questions because I take too long. I average around 1 minute and half, sometimes closer to 2 mins, even on the easier questions. I think it's because I'm trying to reason it out completely (find all alternative assumptions, etc.) However, on blind review my accuracy is pretty good, as I'll usually get all or almost all of them right. Are there any techniques or strategies you guys use in order to increase speed on weakening q's, or even all LR question types? Thanks!

1

I would appreciate if somebody could clarify this one for me..

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-72-section-2-question-14/

Here, JY equates, “Those who ate the most chocolate were the most likely to feel depressed” with “Chocolate Consumption –positively correlated with– Depression”

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-47-section-1-question-26/

Here, JY says “Ones who improved the most were the ones who learned to write the most automatically” is not establishing a correlation. (because we don't know what happened to the 2nd tier people)

What’s going on?

I have also posted a similar question on the PT 72 S2 Q14 down in the comment..

1. Those who ate the most chocolate were the most likely to feel depressed.

2. The more chocolate one consumed, the more likely he/she felt depressed.

Aren’t these two different in meaning? Because for the first statement we don’t know what happened to the middle/low range chocolate eaters..

But we still translate both of them as..

Chocolate Consumption –positively correlated with– Depression

Thoughts?

Thanks in advance!

0

hey guys, just wanted to share with you how i've been drilling LR recently and let you know that so far it has been paying off.

i'm sure its nothing ground breaking and has certainly been done before, but it has helped me anticipate the answer choices :) -- it occurred to me after hearing Johnathan say that he never uses POE to get to the answer choices...

http://imgur.com/wFQnSGE

1

Earlier this week during a Sage/Instructor chat on Discord with Jonathan, argument structure came up. The following link is the only list of LR questions I've been able to find with argument structure. This list mainly groups LR questions by flaw type (circular reasoning, false binarism, appeal to authority etc). If you CTRL+F you can search by "correlation/causation" for that subset of phenomenon/hypothesis questions and for conditional logic search "formal logic" or "necessary/sufficient". This is the closest thing I've found to a list of LR questions per PT by argument type. http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=108425

5

Hello 7Sage!

I have problems for this question.

The question stem mentions the preference in Passage A:

Preference for coherence connecting variety, not too simple (pure tone) = not interesting; not too complex = bad

so i'm looking for some kind of in the middle of the spectrum

I choose Answer (A): Preference for white noice when sleeping : not totally silence (pure tone) ; not too loud (too complex)

Answer (B): not knowing why it's matching the preference analogy?

Thanks for your help!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-58-section-2-passage-4-passage/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-58-section-2-passage-4-questions/

0

I am scheduled to write the December 2016 LSAT. I am having some anxiety regarding the photo requirement. In my opinion, the photo fits the requirements. However, the photo was taken with an I-Phone 7 and although it is clear, I am still worried about the particular proctor I may encounter on test day that would say otherwise. I have read various forums and in general, people have have minimal trouble with the proctors accepting their photos.

However, I am worried that I might get that one proctor who gives me grief. Is there any way that an actual LSAC employee can confirm that my photo is acceptable? It is 326 pixels per inch, which is well above the minimum of 72 pixels per inch. If by chance that the photo is not accepted, can I bring a professionally taken passport photo as well as my passport and driver's licence as "back up."

I have read some horror stories regarding proctors who are uninformed about LSAC rules and turn students away or who also unnecessarily turn students away for minutiae that they deem unacceptable, in a pathetic attempt to exercise power. People who are taking the LSAT are usually under immense stress and have likely spent a good amount of money applying to law schools and paying LSAC registration fees. LSAC should make more concerted efforts so that the proctors (who are not LSAC employees) do not make arbitrary, subjective judgment calls. Honestly, the previous requirement of having a passport taken and then attached as a physical copy to the LSAT ticket was a much better option, in my opinion. The fact that they base so much on "the proctor's discretion" is just ridiculous to me. Can anyone share their experiences regarding the photo requirement? Is anyone else stressed about this or am I just being nuts?!

0

The lesson Logic Games Habits for Speed and Accuracy says about re-writing rules in visual language: "Write out rules neatly, close to each other, numbered [emphasis added]."

I have been wondering why JY always numbers his re-written rules. I've not seen any use made of the numbers that helps to answer questions. I can see occasional convenience of reference when, in talking to us watchers of the video explanations, JY deletes or combines or uses a rule. But I'm not as yet seeing a reason for me to number my rules.

0

JY has said that the target completion times shown under the explanation videos are for those who aspire to -0 or -1 per section (I think he intends section score rather than individual game score), and that students who are not yet adepts should expect longer times.

I've just been working on PT 61 S3 G4. I did the game cold and took more than 15 minutes with -1. Then I watched JY's explanation, admired it as usual, and noted that the target time annotation is 10 minutes for this "very hard" game and JY said at the start of the video that it took him a little over 9 1/2 minutes. Then I re-did the game; with no significant delays it took me 13:25 and I was -0. By "significant" I mean more than 5-10 seconds. It took me almost four minutes longer than JY said it took him. What's going on here?

One thing that's going on is that I am quite pessimistic about being able to finish four games on the upcoming Dec. 3 test.

I would love to see a video of JY (or anyone) solving a difficult LG cold in approximately the listed target time. Are there any of those?

0

How do you diagram "is"/"usually" statements? For example, PT 54 Section 4 Q 22.

"The morally preferable act is usually the one that serves the long term interest. Because of this, businesses often have compelling reasons to execute the morally preferable act."

I halt on these SUfficient assumption questiins because they are not readily diagrammable...

Another one is diagramming causal statements:

"Most friendships begin because someone felt comfortable approaching a stranger"

0

I am not sure why answer choice D in question 68 section 3 of PT 68 is incorrect. Here is an explanation for why I think D can be considered the correct answer.

I made 3 assumptions about parallel reasoning questions which I would like to explain with aid of the following (flawed) reference argument:

Premises: 1. A --> B

2. A --> C

Conclusion: B -->C

Assumption 1) Contrapositives are permitted and do not change the structure of parallel reasoning question. For example, the following argument would be considered parallel to the reference argument:

Premises: 1. not B --> not A (this is a contrapositive of A --> B)

2. A --> C

Conclusion: not C --> not B (this is a contrapositive of B --> C)

Assumption 2) Swapping a given variable with its negation at every single occurrence of the said variable does not change the structure of the argument. This is because any variable can be redefined to be the negated version of its original definition. For instance, instead of defining D = dog, we can define D = not dog and then swap every single occurrence of D and not D in the argument without affecting its structure.

For example, the following would be considered parallel to the argument stated above (in assumption #1) and thus, by extension, also to the reference argument:

Premises: 1. not B --> A

2. not A --> not C

Conclusion: C --> not B

Note that I swapped A and not A as well as C and not C from the example in assumption #1.

3) The positioning of the premises is irrelevant to the structure of the argument and thus swapping them is permissible. For instance, the following argument would be considered parallel to the reference argument:

Premises: 1. A --> C

2. A --> B

Conclusion: B --> C

I just swapped premises 1 and 2 from the reference argument.

Now, onto the question. Here is how I traced out the argument in the stimulus:

Premises: 1. balcony --> fireplace

2. balcony --> no 1-bedroom

Conclusion: 1-bedroom ---> no fireplace

Replacing words with symbols in the above argument:

Premises: 1. A --> B

2. A --> no C

Conclusion: C ---> no B

Swap C and no C (assumption #2):

Premises: 1. A --> B

2. A --> C

Conclusion: no C ---> no B

Take contrapositive of conclusion (assumption #1):

Premises: 1. A --> B

2. A --> C

Conclusion: B --> C (contrapositive of no C ---> no B)

Analysis of flaw: one necessary condition leads to another necessary condition. I am going to look for parallel of this in the answer choice.

Now, onto answer choice D. Here is how I traced out the argument in the answer choice:

Premises: 1. cat --> no dog

2. dog --> no fish

Conclusion: cat ---> fish

Take contrapositive of premise #1 and conclusion (assumption #1):

Premises: 1. dog --> no cat (contrapositive of cat --> no dog)

2. dog --> no fish

Conclusion: no fish ---> no cat (contrapositive of cat --> fish)

Swap premises #1 and #2 (assumption #3):

Premises: 1. dog --> no fish

2. dog --> no cat

Conclusion: no fish ---> no cat

Change to symbols:

Premises: 1. A --> no B

2. A --> no C

Conclusion: no B ---> no C

Swap B with no B and C with no C (assumption #2):

Premises: 1. A --> B

2. A --> C

Conclusion: B ---> C

Eureka!!! Exact same structure as the stimulus.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-68-section-3-question-24/

1

Hi All,

So the stimulus in #20 reads,

"If one does not criticize a form of behavior in oneself or vow to stop it, then one should not criticize that form of behavior in another."

Would this sentence translate to

1. ~Criticize one's own behaviour AND ~Vow to stop it --> ~ Criticize other's behavior or

2. ~Criticize one's own behaviour OR ~ Vow to stop it --> ~ Criticize other's behavor?

I initially thought that the latter was the case but not sure about it anymore... Any feedback will be greatly appreciated!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-77-section-2-question-20/

0

I agree it's easier to see the questions with game elements as initials rather than as the (often bizarre) spelled-out names that appear on the test. But as time is my big hurdle, I'm skeptical that the time it takes to rewrite the questions is worth it. As best I can tell by introspection it takes me little time to do the mental translation. Does anyone want to make an argument that I ought to rewrite the questions?

0

Hi All,

So I'm still struggling to identify exactly when certain arguments could be strengthened or weakened by the total number of samples (or any sort of number play for that matter) and when they cannot be. I remember seeing a few questions in the past where certain group was seeing a particular pattern or a phenomenon while the other group didn't and the discrepancy was due to some problems related to the size of the sample in one group (either their total number of participants were not counted properly, thereby inflating the trend) etc.

PT 77 Section 2 #19: A recent study examined the daytime and nighttime activity patterns of two populations of tree-dwelling lemurs - the first living in a rain forest, where tree canopy cover is consistent year0round, and the second living in a deciduous forest, where many trees lose their leaves during the winter months. Both groups of lemurs were found to be more nocturnal during winter months than they were the rest of the year. However, the winter increase in nocturnal activity was significantly more pronounced for the population living in the deciduous forest than it was for the population living in the forest.

For the question above, none of the answer choices really stood out for me initially and when I looked through them again, I noticed how the AC (D) was talking about the bird population in these forests are different, in fact, the lemur population in the rain forest is twice the size of the population in the deciduous forest... I thought that if that's the case, couldn't it be possible that the nocturnal activity looks more pronounced in the deciduous forest even though the two forests had the same number of birds that are both just as active at night? The correct answer turned out to be (B) which talked about the high-flying bird predators who hunt their prey during daylight...

So my question is, how are we supposed to know when these numbers actually come in play and exactly what the question means in this case - whether there are more % of these birds in each forest (in which case the population size matters) or it could be that the entire bird population is following a certain trend?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-77-section-2-question-19/

0

This is my weakest Question Type, and although I have practiced memorizing all 20 flaws I have trouble recognizing them on the LSAT because I am often stuck between two answer choices. What should I do? What was your method or how do you approach this QT in terms of improvement?

2

I got this question correct but really don't know why. I look at the answers and they just look like gibberish. I try to break the words down and make the answer sound similar, but I still have no clue what most those answers are saying. I went through the lessons on weakening questions but it didn't seem to help for this type of super wordy question at all. Anyone else struggle with the real wordy weaken questions? Any tips or advice?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-22-section-4-question-21/

0

Confirm action

Are you sure?