Was wondering if someone could give me an explanation in there osn words

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-10-section-2-game-4/

Can someone please explain how we arrive at answer choice D from the stimulus?

If I understand correctly, not routinely unpunished (/RU) equates to sometimes unpunished.

We get /RU by negating the chain presented in the stimulus which is /CH->MG->/RU

From there the author shifts from "routinely" (/RU) to "never" (/U).

So why does the correct answer say confuses "routinely" with "sometimes"? Since the conclusion says never unpunished, I figured it would be confuses "never" with "routine" or "sometimes."

JY's video explanation offers no insight here, but I'll post the link anyways.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-41-section-1-question-22/

Hey, I generally read all the answer choices, but I thought it would save time if not. So, I am essentially asking is it better to be safe than sorry or save time? Thanks!

Can anyone who took this test pm me? Thanks

I have a hard time identifying exactly what the author's attitude is. Can anyone shed a little light on this subject ?

Is it ok to translate "Writing can only succeed if it meets the expectations." as:

"Meet Expectation --> Succeed"

or

Is it "Succeed --> Meet Expectation"?

I don't know if we see a sentence like this on LSAT, but I just saw this sentence in real life and got confused by its placement of the word "only."

So I chose D because I thought that the conclusion of the stimulus was that the US is behind in the sense that they should make these safety regulations a requirement not that they aren't actually safe because in the stimulus it says that they are all successful in reducing occupational injuries and I thought it was reasonable to infer that it would start out as volunteering then lead to a law.

I thought A was incorrect because we're speculating, we can't possibly know what will happen in the future unless were told something in the stimulus, so long story short, I am confused haha, can someone explain this one to me please? TYA!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-19-section-2-question-24/

I will be taking the June LSAT and I find that I sometimes struggle to finish the entire RC section. I am consistently in the middle of the fourth passage when 5 minutes are called, of course, making me nervous and unsure of the most effective way to approach the question. Does anyone have advice on how to approach the last passage without much time? Yesterday I took a PT and tried to skim the passage before approaching the questions, that proved ineffective. I am striving to get a 170+ on the LSAT and so this is a section I truly feel I need to have a strategy when approaching. Any advice would be appreciated!

It seems I am in a pretty unfortunate situation! When I began taking the practice tests, my scores were steadily increasing, to the point that I was achieving 15+ points over my baseline score for the first LSAT I took without studying. However, over the last week each PT I take I see my score decrease more and more to the point that I am now back at my baseline score. I don't understand why as I went through the 7Sage program and feel as though I am really understanding all of the questions. I am hoping to get a 170+ on the June LSAT and this is a seriously huge setback. Does anyone have any advice for me? I am truly beginning to loose hope on my score and there's only 5 days until the LSAT! Crying forever, SOS I would appreciate any advice, insight, or personal experiences!

What up gang, 6 days til D day, who's pumped!!!???

Anyway, I trying to drill Logic games tonight and tomorrow, wondering if anyone has a list or some examples of "The forgotten few" as Powergames calls them. Those are Pattern, Circular Linearity and Mapping Games. I'm going to start looking through my past tests for examples, and I'll post the PT number and section of those I find for anyone interested, but thought some crowd-sourcing could save us all some effort :)

I have found a pattern of question I continuously get wrong. I think I know why I get it wrong too. In part it's not having a clear enough understanding of exactly which flaw I am seeing, but the other part is I can not understand what the heck the answer choices mean. An example of this question type is 49.2.18 (test, section, question).

The answer choices say thing like;

E.) Takes for granted that a phenomenon that can best be understood as having certain properties can best be understood only through reasoning that shares those properties. ---------- What did the test just say to me? Should I be offended? Is it insulting my mom?

Or

C.) Fails to distinguish adequately between the characteristics of a phenomenon as a whole and those of the deliberately isolated parts of that phenomenon. ---------- I think it's saying "Doesn't show the difference between the whole and the parts" but I am not sure.

These answer choices appear on every test, in one convoluted way or another, and each time I trip fall, pick a bubble and move on.

Advice for unpacking these answer choices, and maybe to addressing flaws better?

I am right now finishing a passage about totally half an hour, and mostly -2. Desperated! Any hope there?

How you guys deal with RC. I know most of you may do it effortlessly.

Cynthia

I have been reading horror stories of people scoring like -7 points from their average PT scores before the test. I am content with my PT average and my scores have been very consistent, but I'm terrified by these stories of people underperforming significantly on test day. Is this even a common thing, to have your PT average that radically different than your LSAT score???

I understood "A or B but not both" as one of the followings:

Then what is the contrapositive of it?

A/B = CONTRAPOSITIVE => /A + /B ?????

But my last statement (3) indicates /A and /B could fall under the definition of "A or B but not both".

Can someone clarify my thoughts please :(

This whole time I thought "more likely" = strictly correlation because it means the same as "tend to" which is also correlation, but it seems like it can be used as causation as well according to the more recent PTs.

I'm not going to do anything LSAT related the weekend before, other than perhaps one set of logic games (without scoring them) on Sunday to keep my mind fresh or something. It's a very odd feeling to have a full weekend beforehand; I took for the first time in December, and it was a lot easier to just have a chill Friday night to do nothing. 3 full nights seems kind of a long time, and I'm not drinking or going out for obvious reasons. The NBA finals will probably be over at that point, so I don't even have that to distract me. Perhaps I'll binge watch the new season of house of cards or the handmaiden's tale (which I've heard rave reviews about), play some FIFA, or gasp read a book. What're y'all planning on doing to relax?

Hey guys,

So my problem is the my test is next week and I have been devoting so much time to LR, that I am kind of still slipping up in LG. I have the fundamentals so I think, but I'm still bombing the LG. I have the powerscore books and I'm trying to Drill. While there isn't that many questions in the Starter to do on 7sage to help me practice I'm lost. Im not pushing my test back! I think I'm getting overwhelmed and btw i already at Test my goal is pretty low but it will get me into school. Judge or me or not but all I need is about half the test right. How do I get back on top of LG. I don't know where I'm slipping. Any advice for LG or overall tactics??

Printed out my ticket for the June LSAT's this morning. On the ticket it says "report no later than 12:30". I thought the exam started at 12:30?

What time are y'all arriving at the test center?

Hello! Does anyone know easy quantitative way for finding maximum/minimum number of remaining events that could occur when certain variables are selected in In/Out game?

For example, lets say there are 10 variables in total: A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, and J.

Rules:

A -> /B

If B does not occur, then either H or I but not both occur

D can only come with one other variable

D and E can't come together

H -> E + F

Question: Suppose that C and E both occur. What is the maximum AND minimum number of remaining events that could occur?

THANK YOU in advance :D

Hey guys!

I was wondering if anyone could help clarify this tough Weaken question for me. Here's the link to the question: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-28-section-3-question-17/

I though (C) was positing an alternative explanation for the phenomenon (the significant salary gap between employers): decreased readership. I didn't feel good choosing this AC because the conclusion was that lower wages were justified, and (C) doesn't really touch on that. But, I just thought (B) was making too far of a jump. Thoughts?

I don't know if "besides' meaning except for or including, which are the opposite meanings. For example, for PT52, the conclusion says 'So legislators who value democracy should not propose any law inhibiting behavior that is not harmful to anyone besides the person engaging in it." Does it mean to include the person or to exclude the person? Thank you for the help!!

Hey 7Sagers,

While going through my tests, I have noticed that there is not a particular question/questions I get wrong on LR, which is a bit odd to me. For example, sometimes I will get NA, MBT, Resolve the Paradox questions wrong, and on another section it will be Sufficient Assumption, Weaken, and Evaluate. I am not sure if I am missing these due to rushing, or what another reason could be (since I get questions of the same type right in the section also), so I was wondering if anyone had any tips for me... or how I could possibly improve this :S

Happy Studying!

So I am in reading comp right now, it is literally the last thing I am doing in my prep before going back to PTs. But I am still having the same problems that I was having last year when I was studying. For example, if there is 7 questions in a section I am constantly missing 3-4. I have tried the method JY recommended. It has not helped make anything better. I am getting really frustrated because I have had great growth in all other sections of the exam but I am still sucking the big one in RC. I dont test until September so I have time to figure this out.

I have tried going slow and seeing what happens, I have tried to keep the timed 3.5 minutes, I have tried not marking and marking the passage. I feel like I have exhausted all areas. If I were only missing one or two questions a passage I would make peace with it. But I am leaving to many points on the table to make peace with it right now.

Any advice or help would be GREATLY appreciated!!

Hello all,

So, I'm basically 1 month behind, but I'm trying to make up for lost time (I work at a law firm, and I work A LOT of overtime), but essentially the only thing I can really see (in terms of losing out) would be the number of PTs taken before the Sept. 2017 LSAT. I am leaning towards just finishing the CC (I'm in the Ultimate+) and have about let's say 16 "topics" to do, and I think what I will do is cover the topics (but not do every single problem set). Maybe do 1-4 problem sets for each topic and then move on to the PTs in preparation for the Sept. LSAT.

Thoughts?

Hi everyone,

I just printed the PT 1-35 LG Drill package and would like to use it for the fool proof. I have the following concerns:

Is there any practice test(s) that is too old which we should avoid working on?

Is there any LG question type(s) which no longer appears on recent LSAT which we should avoid as well?

Thank you.