Discussions

LSAT

New post

209 posts in the last 30 days

One of the RC videos that I watched mentioned that when something (call it X) happens more & more frequently, it does not mean that X happens most of the time. But I read it from one of the PowerScore posts that "more often than not" means MOST. They sound quite similar to me, so I'm not sure how to make a distinction between them. If I change it to "X happens more & more frequently THAN NOT" would it equate to most?

1

I have been analyzing all the June 2007 (public domain) questions one by one, and find that they all neatly fit into very neat symbolic argument patterns--except for Section II Question 24. I would appreciate any comments on this particular question, especially if someone can help me write up a symbolic logic representation of it.

Please don't post full questions on the discussion forums, even if this is a free PT! You can see the question and explanation here:

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-june-2007-section-2-question-24

0

Hey All,

Had a question that I was confused about. Statement is, "People who aren't handsome are happy". Isn't the logical indicator "not" here, meaning it is in group 4 (Negate Necessary). Translated into lawgic, shouldn't this be, "Happy -> /Handsome ; Handsome -> /Happy". However, in the lessons, I found it to be " /Handsome -> Happy ; /Happy -> Handsome".

Any help would be appreciated. Thank you for reading this.

0

I'm currently working on the logic games bundle. While I've been getting -1 or -2 per game untimed I continue to test every answer choice even after getting an answer just to be sure it's correct. I'm wondering if this will hinder my speed while doing actual timed games. Should I just pick the correct answer and continue or actually double check. At this point I'm focusing on accuracy not speed. Any comments would help. Thank you :)

1

I'm having the hardest time improving my timing on games. I can get the questions right but I can't do them fast enough to finish all four games-- on average I only get through 3 games. I'm doing my practice using Jy's method -- I can improve my timing on games that I've done over again. But I can't improve my timing on games I've never done before. Any tips are greatly appreciated.

0

I'm really stuck. I understand that the correct answer is A, but I can't diagram the logic out. I'm fairly certain it involves subsets, which has always thrown me. So if anyone knows how, please share!

0

I got this one right, and I was able to easily eliminate C-E, but I don't understand how to eliminate B.

I spent a lot of time debating between A and B. I chose A as the right answer because if urban populations have doubled in the past decade then it does not indicate an increase deaths but rather indicates the population was the same amount of deaths as before SO it is not an increased amount of deaths proportionate to the death rate.

Can someone please explain B to me!? Thanks!!!

0

Hey All,

Can anyone help me with this question (PT27 S4 Q15). This one is confusing and bothering me at the same time.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-27-section-4-question-15

The passage says "It is often said that beauty is subjective. But this judgement has to be false..." From what I understand, the author is saying that beauty isn't subjective (meaning, your opinion will be different from my opinion about what we consider to be beautiful). We are asked to weaken this argument where the correct answer is "C" (Our own standard of beauty was strongly influenced by our exposure to works that were considered beautiful in other cultures").

Doesn't that actually strengthen the argument rather than weaken it? If my standard of beautiful art was shaped by what my art teacher thinks is beautiful art, then that means that I am just following her opinion and have no say of my own (therefore, my opinion is not subjective at all), which actually strengthens the argument.

I know I am missing something but am totally confused as to what it is. Any help would be appreciated :)

0

Been trying for several months to tie down logic games. Hasn't happened yet. I'm averaging about -3 on my last several preptests, but that belies big swings. For example, PT 60 crushed me, PT 61 was -0, and PT 62 was -6.

I don't know if I'm very good at diagnosing my own problems. The only trend I can maybe see -- and this might just be recency bias -- is that I struggle with open-ended and even slightly nonstandard games. For example, PT 62 game 2 is definitely a grouping game, broadly defined, but it's a weird one. Same with game 3 from that test. I've done literally every game ever published multiple times but I don't have the pattern recognition necessary to adapt on my first time through lots of games.

Is there any specific remedy for this type of thing? Should I just keep "foolproofing?" I don't want to keep banging my head against the wall if there's something more targeted I can do, because time is becoming precious for us June takers.

0

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-29-section-2-passage-1-passage

Hi everyone -

I'm currently working on Reading Comprehension and am working through The LSAT Trainer. In Lesson 35, an art passage from PT 29 is dissected.

My question is about question #6. Though I understand that the author did not agree that the work of pre-World War I painters had the power to predict social changes (and therefore why this is the correct answer choice), I do not see how answer choice D can be said to have been shown in the passage. Mike Kim writes in his explanation that the author did say that artists had the power to anticipate later artists in the second paragraph, but I don't see how this was stated or can even be inferred. "Developments in the arts" does not equal "anticipation of later artists." Arts ≠ Artists. Maybe he is seeing something that I'm just not seeing, but I would love to understand how he got to this conclusion.

Am I just being too critical of the words here?

Any input is appreciated!

Oh and a PS to anyone who is unsure about buying The LSAT Trainer - it's helped me increase my practice test scores by 16 points but more importantly it's helped me to form better habits for understanding why answer choices are right/wrong and what exactly each question type demands - which none of the other prep books did for me.

0

So I now have a binder several inches thick that holds all of my games. I try to do AT LEAST 5 games a day on top of the rest of my life and all those sheets have added up. But the real problem is that without me doing some really intense work, I have no way to quickly and easily look at my aggregate games data. I think it would be great if 7sage could add a feature where I could select a game (ex. PT 66, game 2) and then I would enter the time I took to finish the game and my answers. Then 7sage could show me all the stats about that game and all my other games too. I could see past scores/times for certain games. It could even keep track of different question types (new/substitute rule, MBT, MBF, could be true, etc.) so I could even tailor my prep down to the question. I think it wouldn't be too too difficult to implement because 7sage already has all the Q-types in their system. Anyways just a thought.

5

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-23-section-1-game-2

I watched the explanation for this game and am struggling with why in the set up you can not assume that HIRED equals INTERVIEWED (i.e., that they are interchangeable terms), since interviewing is a required condition for hiring?

I interpreted the corresponding rules to be just attempting to confuse me and depicted all hires as, by default, interviewed in my rules interpretation, e.g., I interpreted rules 4 and 5 to be combined as: F-K-M (if F then K then M). But clearly this does not work in the execution of the game!!!

Why is this not a valid interpretation?

0

I realize as I work on my speed in the LR section that it is very important to be able to compartmentalize each part of the stim in your mind to quickly attack the question. But, I find myself having to re-read those pesky convoluted stims which is killing my time on certain questions.

Do any of you map out (basic bracketing) the premises and conclusion on the convoluted stims? My theory is that if I do map on these types of questions I will be able to really hone in on the P and C and if there is weird language it will be out of the way.

Should I try and keep practicing doing it all in the brains lol ?

0

I just formed a in person BR group with one other person. Given the fact that our meeting are relatively short cannot be extended. Could you tell me how the BR group process can be improved?

We use LR sections from PT 1-35, we take one section together and BR the section after a 5 minutes break; because our meeting are about two hours long we only manage to go through those questions that our answers differ from each other (usually 9 to 10 questions) and leave the other questions untouched.

1

Hi all,

I'm wondering if you have thoughts and advice for someone who is consistently running out of time on the logic games section of practice tests. On my most recent practice test, I did 3/4 games and got every answer correct on those that I got to, but completely ran out of time on one of the games. In blind review, I was able to get all the correct answers on that 4th game, in under 8 minutes.

Maybe it's partly a confidence thing? I feel like I'm checking answers very carefully and maybe should trust my diagrams more...? I'm not quite sure. Any advice for how to proceed would be greatly appreciated! Thanks so much

0

I started working through the LG bundle concurrently with LSAT Trainer 20 days ago, I manged to finish PT 1 to PT 11 logic games using Pacifico attack strategy, while trying to push down the time one minute under target time recommended for each game. The problem is that despite the fact I took every logic game from PT 1-35 at least once (nearly four months ago) my first attempt time always is at least 2-3 minutes higher than target time and for some wired games it is much higher.

Any idea how can I solve this problem? I am afraid that I am burning the Bundle without getting much out of it.

0

Admin edit: Please don't post full course questions! Instead, link to the question:

https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/quiz-on-drawing-valid-conclusions-with-translations-4-answers

But what if I change the question into: Geniuses do not date lazy people. Vesper is smart. (skip this useless sentence) Derek is extremely attractive and lazy.

Isn't it incorrect to conclude that Vesper will not date Derek because unlike the original question, you can't automatically equate Vesper being smart as being a genius? In the original question, being genius must mean one is smart, but being smart doesn't guarantee you are genius smart.

I'm trying to flip things around and see how different conclusions can be made and so on. Feedback would be much appreciated! :)

0

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-49-section-2-question-21

We are told that Sugared beverages can be helpful in avoiding dehydration AND sugared beverages can delay muscle fatigue.

However, the stimulus denotes this is BEFORE one is dehydrated.Or at least that was my reading.

If you are already dehydrated, we are not told sugared beverages beverages with any level of sugar will help.

Thus for B, if you have problems that have come as a result of being dehydrated, how would taking in lightly sugared beverages be of assistance? If anything, it would seem they would make your problems worse every time for it would be drawing water from the blood to the stomach.

I might be interpreting this incorrectly.

Any and all help is greatly appreciated.

0

Hey, I was wondering that when we say that A causes B, do we understand it to mean that whenever A will happen B shall follow or does such a causal relationship accommodates some instances wherein A happens but then B does not follow. I had trouble with question 11 in LR Section 1 on PT 58 and I think it was because I wasn't clear on my understanding of causation.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-58-section-1-question-11

0

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-74-section-3-passage-2-questions

Okay, so I really debated between "C" and "D" (the former apparently being a crappy choice), and ended up selecting "C" only because the term "approving" in "D" seemed too strong and altogether inapplicable for describing the author's attitude. "C" to me seemed like a piece of the author's overall attitude, but is this in itself reason to not select "C"?

In other words, do questions regarding one's attitude inherently ask for the overall, holistic viewpoint as opposed to something the author may or may not agree with? I don't think I have ever seen a correct answer choice claiming the author has a particular viewpoint or judgement on the topic discussed when the author seems to have no such voice at all. The author points to evidence supporting the lawyers' claim, yes, but even if the author believes there to be sufficient evidence for the legitimacy of "stealing thunder," there is no indication of his approval of the use of it. By "approving," does the author believe that the use of "stealing thunder" is logical and sound? If "approving" were to take that meaning, I can completely understand why "D" is correct.

Finally, I assume "C" is wrong at least in part because of the term "anecdotal evidence," which doesn't fit at all with the speculation discussed at the end of the paragraph. My two concerns, then, lie with the use of "approving" as well as the inherent meaning of Attitude questions in general.

Thanks in advance for any responses.

0

Confirm action

Are you sure?