I am learning MBT Questions. JY uses diagrams. Should we, too?

Hi guys! General question about strengthening questions. I know from reviewing the core curriculum that, in theory, you can strengthen an argument one of two ways:

1.) adding premises that support the conclusion

2.) increasing the relevance of an existing premise to a conclusion

However, the more strengthening explanations I watch, the more I notice the right answer never really adds an independent extra premise. It always relates back to an existing premise, and makes it more relevant. Also JY mentions in several videos that the AC's that seem to add extra premises are the trap answers.

So, are there examples of correct strengthening AC's that do add an extra premise that in no way has to do with any of the premises already in the stimulus? Because if so, that would be quite useful in identifying trap answer choices. Thank you!

Taking the LSAT in Sept - just finished LSAT trainer/my 3rd prep test (65) and the one section I'm not feeling even alright in is RC. I scored a 162 on the above test and missed 12 in RC. For those who have seen improvement - how do you train yourself to synthesize the information quickly and accurately so as to be able to answer the questions that follow? Unless the content is fairly simple, I have a hard time doing the above.

Anyone in the Durham Region or GTA planning on taking the December 2017 test?

Interested in possibly starting a study group if I get any takers. Open to online and/or in person.

Message me!

So I have an online program from Power Score, and one from 7 Sage...I've mostly been focusing on 7sage, but did some drilling from the Power Score workbooks today on weaken questions, and I bombed the question set. I only drilled weaken games, and got -10 (out of a total 30 questions). I looked at which prep tests the questions were from, and it was tests 19-29... are the questions different from those tests? They definitely read weirder.

I'm a bit worried because weakening questions are my strongest question types in LR, and I'm kinda freaked out I did that poorly.

Thoughts?

Any idea when the LR videos for test question explanation will be back up and running?

Hope this helps others:

#1. Weakening (Except)

○ I assumed that the correct answer choice (which would need to be the one that did not

weaken the argument) needed to be one that strengthened the argument. In reality,

something that is neutral suffices as something that does not weaken

#2. Flaw

○ I failed to realize that words like (to) promote, elevate, develop, forward, advance, stimulate,

assist, foster, boost, catalyze, nurture and encourage are NOT synonyms for sufficient nor

necessary.

○ Instead of choosing the answer choice that attacks the argument, I chose the answer choice that

merely validated the opposing argument. Just because an argument is true that does not mean its

opposite is false.

○ I failed to realize that the correct answer choice was subtle which lead me to choose the best

incorrect answer choice since it appeared to say what the correct answer choice is saying.

#3. Main Conclusion

○ I chose the context and/or intro statement instead of the conclusion

#4. NA

○ I skimmed the stimulus

○ I did not choose the correct answer because it was a pretty strong statement which the correct NA

answer choice usually is not. Sometimes the NA is strong.

○ I did not see how the correct answer choice helped to connect everything up. Focused way too much

on looking for those ACs that when negated, destroy the argument. I did this at the expense of

looking for those ACs that when negated burn down the bridge formed by the correct AC.

○ I failed to correctly identify what the implication would be if the assumption inherent in the

correct answer choice was reversed.

○ I failed to focus on the conclusion and instead mistakenly focused on the premise/support that is

integral to the conclusion

○ I assumed that the correct answer choice would need to, when negated, be able to destroy the

argument but it merely needs to make the argument irrelevant.

#5. Parallel Flaw

○ I failed to ensure that all of the elements of the flawed argument I chose amongst the answer

choices aligned with all of the elements of the stimulus' flawed argument including modifiers such

as "safely" or "obviously conclude" versus "must conclude".

○ Sometimes does not mean some

#6. Strengthening

○ Only appears to be strong but does nothing to strengthen the argument

So in the LG section JY has target times for each LG game, but I am unable to find this same thing for the RC passages. I am practicing RC and using JY's method; I spend 4 minutes up from reading the passage, visualizing the structure, and summarizing each paragraph inside my head after I read it. And then just tackle the questions. Sometimes passages take 7 minutes, sometimes 9 or more depending on the level of questions. What method do you guys use to determine a target time in which you should finish the passage in a section?

I am by no means a master of this test BUT i had located a recurring question type that i struggled with.. NA, and i am proud to say that i have conquered it!!!

How? With intense drilling.

I took all the NA questions from PT 1-20 and broke them into small digestible groups of 5s

I then did them at random times through the day for a week.

NA is the strangest question type for me bc it asks for something that is so obvious that my brain fills in the information for me.

By becoming sensitive to the kind of "in your face" obviousness that the question is asking for, makes the AC stand out like a sore thumb.

If anyone else has success stories or methods of slaying the beast (lsat), i would love to hear them

Why is D a flaw?

The question banks have them as silent videos but I really want to have them on paper in front me to drill. Thank you in advance.

So i have narrowed down my problems to MBT, and SA. Which tutor would you guys suggest for intensive stimulus breakdown and analysis into its logic

I'm taking the LSAT in Sept 2017. I work full time, and am considering taking a few days or a week off of work at some point between now and the test. When would folks advise would be best? I'd like to use the time to really focus on studying, take a few more PTs, etc. I am thinking maybe the first week of September. I want to do it early enough that I can still have some improvements from studying (meaning, I don't think taking the week right before the test is when I would see real gains). Any thoughts on timing are appreciated--thanks!

The reason why E doesn't help is because E requires us to go one more step to explain why people aren't wearing seat belts?(because they are not obeying the law?)

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-37-section-2-question-17/

So the common denominator between all 3 of these question types is..logic.

I have been through the curriculum multiple times. I know how to translate into logic. I have memorized the indicators. I understand existential quantifiers.

Why am i struggling so much with these?

At 2:00 of his explanation video of PT57.S3.Q18 (https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-57-section-3-question-18/ ), J.Y. refers to "the Dramamine question."

I think "the Dramamine question" is PT4.S1.Q4 ("A survey was recently conducted among ferry passengers") but does anyone know if there is a video of his explanation of "the Dramamine question" in the CC of 7Sage?

Or is there another LR question about the effectiveness of treatment of seasickness?

Thank you in advance :)

How do you drill?

What do you drill?

Just wondering what qualifies as a prerequisite for drilling

I just signed up for the Sept LSAT in Orange County (Southern California) and was placed on a wait list. Is it likely to get off the wait list for nearby test centers or do people usually get reassigned to a location that is pretty far away? Should I try to contact LSAC and see if there are other ways to get around the issue (like taking the test on Monday) since I'm not too thrilled about driving 50 miles before taking the test.

Any advice/input would be greatly appreciated!!

Should the RC passages all take the same time, or should you expect some to take longer than others as in LG?

Can you wear your watch during the LSAT or does it have to be on your desk?

Thanks!

I've watched the explanation for this video...but one of the conditional statements still has me confused. Basically, J.Y combined a /J and a J, to make a conditional chain...can someone take a look at this video and break it down?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-34-section-4-game-4/

So i was wondering what the difference between A and D was

When it comes to LG there is the foolproof method.

When it comes to LR there is a plan of attack and method for each question, and the ability to drill each question type until its fluent.

When it comes to RC.... argh. I sit everyday and do a timed section. After, i write down every part of every passage and how they relate to each other in my own words. And i may understand it after all this. I may even get them all right after this. But to no avail, when it comes to tomorrows section. I will suck just as badly as today

I am starting to realize that it is not necessary to understand the whole stimulis. Often, just understanding the premise and conclusion is enough to get the right answer.

Why wouldnt A be considered an attack on the premise that says that land becomes too poor to support agriculture?

For some reason whenever I print out a Practice Test, RC and LR print out fine. The print is visible in those 2 sections. Dark and very clear. But the LG section is always very light and thinly printed. I can barely read it. Whether i print them out individually or as a whole section or the whole test. On chrome and on safari This doesn't happen whenever i print out the problem sets from the lesson, but only for the logic games from a PT. Anyone else have this problem? And how can i fix this?