LSAT
New post301 posts in the last 30 days
I'm taking the Sept test and am looking for suggestions of hard/weird games to drill with over the next week (don't worry, I've been studying for the past year so it's not like I've just now decided to take games seriously :) ). I just know that games have become a bit more unconventional in the more recent tests, and I want to practice these types of games to get my brain in the right mode before test day.
So, any recommendations for hard/weird games that have similar properties to the hard/weird games we may expect on the Sept test?
Thanks and happy studying :)
A great grouping game with conditional logic, but I am having some trouble...
I am having trouble understanding how to link up the new condition in this question. I understand what JY is saying in the explanation video and it makes sense but I have no idea how I can apply that in future questions that are similar.
With the new condition I cannot help but see H -> /S -> J .... "contraposed" as /J -> S -> /H. I don't see how the /S -> J relationship changes, I am trying so hard. Any advice?
https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-33-section-4-game-2/
What skipping strategies have worked for people out there (especially for LR)? I haven't found something that really works for me yet, and while I usually finish sections, I don't find myself with much (or any) spare time. At this point, I skip the Parallel Flaw questions when they're past #15 or so, but that's really the only thing I stick to. I am able to move on from a hard one after 2 minutes or so, but I'm having a really hard time getting past the mentality of "just a couple more seconds and I can get it" and "I've already put this much time in, it doesn't make sense for me to leave it now."
What do other people do?
I'm struggling with Reading Comp.. pretty badly. I miss like a total of 10 questions on my Reading Comp sections... that is not good.
Has anybody here ever struggled with Reading Comp but found a technique/way that helped you perform really well on Reading Comp now?
I always summarize each paragraph, underline/circle key words and try to understand how all the paragraphs are connected/related after I finish reading a passage. However, I still keep missing like 8-10 question. But I'll usually get down to 2 answer choices (wrong answer choice and correct answer choice), but I'll often times end up choosing the wrong answer choice! Augh.
Timing is also a problem for me. I take about 3-4 minutes reading and analyzing the passages and I Feel like I'm not spending enough time on the questions. I feel rushed and when I see that I only have about 10 minutes left to do my last passage, I start panicking.
Please help. I feel like if I can just do better on my RC section, I'll be able to reach the score that I want.
If you have ever struggled with the RC section in the past, but you've now found a way to do well on it, please teach me your ways!
Is there such a concept?. I have been at RC for a couple months and it still feels far more volatile than i am comfortable with.
Thoughts?
I am having trouble understanding why answer choice A is a necessary assumption. I eliminated this answer choice because of the word ANY. I think it may be due to how I negated this answer choice, focusing of the "quantity" and not on the word "work well."
The way I negated it was: A type of school system that works well in one country will NOT work well in SOME countries." Even if this was true, I don't believe that the argument would be wrecked, as a country could just defer to the next best possible choice of system.
However, if I were to negate focusing on "work well": A type of school system that works well in one country WILL NOT ALWAYS work well in any country. Were this to be true, I can clearly understand why the argument is wrecked.
How are we to go about negating such necessary assumptions? I thought negating "all" was to simply state "some are not." Is there a rule to when we are to negate quantity or note?
Thanks in advance!
https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-54-section-4-question-03/
Does "nearly all" equate to most?
Spotted it in a parallel reasoning question!
Hello!
I really need some help understanding why my answer is incorrect. I believe my board follows all the rules but would love for a set of fresh eyes.
PT6.S4.G4.Q21--> correct answer is C but I chose D.
So I had my game board looking like this:
J ------ O
|
K ----- M -------L
Either my brain is fried or im thick as a rock bc i cannot put into words why C is correct.
https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-79-section-4-question-21/
For those of you who found the RC difficult from the June '17 (PT 81) test and want more practice like that, you should check out PT 5's RC section. I thought it was structured in a really similar way to PT 81 with a similar distribution of difficult among the passages like PT 81.
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/
link to JY's explanation video: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-66-section-4-question-14/
Hey guys,
This is a PSA question that I'm having difficulty with. I can't seem to understand why A is not correct. What is it about the language here that fails to make this the contrapositive of the principle? I understood A to read: "A uni denies a grant application... because the math puzzle has no practical concerns. But isn't this exactly the contrapositive? Aren't we justifying the action "denying the application" (which equates to NOT promoting research, back in the principle's language) specifically because of the math puzzle's impracticality?
That being said, I clearly see that (E) is the correct answer. But during the PT, I was confident A was the contrapositive, chose it, and moved on without glancing at E. A hard lesson that I'll be learning from for sure.
Thanks!
For the last week, Ive been having a really hard time focusing on my PTs, my mind starts to wander after the first section and I want to take a day break or two but Im also nervous of doing that so close to the test date, does anyone have any advice on what I should do or any tips?
Would anyone be willing to walk me through this one? I just can't step back enough to see it clearly and feel certain I understand (and I don't have access to the explanation video). Thank you!
https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-61-section-4-question-25/
I got the MP but I wanted to further analyze... Could someone review my thought process please? (This is a question in CC!)
Part of the stimulus: "But there is a positive role to be played even by these extremists for the social &political inertia that attends environmental issues is so stubborn that even small areas of progress can be made only if the populace fears environmental disaster..."
Does "only if" introduce necessary condition? Thus would the diagram be the following: Small areas of progress can be made --> populace fears environmental disaster (or the other way around...?)
Since it's a conditional statement, it's wrong for A to assert that "little progress that HAS BEEN MADE in improving the environment is mainly due to the fear created by radical environmentalists." We don't know in the stimulus if the progress has actually been made-- it just gives us a conditional. Is it safe to say that (A) requires you to assume something that we have no basis or support for?
Someone had commented, "(For the sake of practice) Notice the gap in the argument – author assumes that the radical environmentalists incite fear in the populace through false extremes (possibly about unlikely environmental disasters) and thereby, allows the possibility for small progress to occur (this is the positive role)." Is this correct? Could someone shed more light into this gap in the argument/ any other flaws?
https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-34-section-2-question-18/
When discussing this passage during a BR call, I thought a certain meme would be appropriate, given the unusual insights of the psychologists. I visualized expanding mental horizons and became one with the universe:
Hey guys,
Got a great question from a student that I thought you could help with. Here it is!
Do you mind answering a question I have about "accurate and complete list" type Qs on the logic games?
So, if I'm not mistaken, for a question like: "Which one of the following is a list of variables, any one of which cannot belong to group A?", we have to check ALL possible worlds and come up with a complete list of all the variables from all the possible worlds that cannot go in A.
--as opposed to: a question like "Which one of the following could be the list of variables that go in group A?" Because this question doesn't have the phrase "any one of which," it would suffice to find an answer choice that matches just ONE of the possible worlds, right?
So my question is:
For a question like "Which one of the following CANNOT be the complete assignment of paralegals to the Thompson case?" (PT 69 G4 Q22), would we have to check ALL possible worlds or just ONE possible world? I'm thinking that because it's not phrased as "Which one of the following is a list of paralegals, any one of whom cannot be assigned to the Thompson case," it would be enough to circle the answer choice that matches just ONE of the possible worlds. Is my intuition correct?
Sorry, this is so much to read through, but it would mean so much to me if you could help me out with this, as I am really confused!
Hey everyone,
So, even though I get most of the SA questions included in the 7sage drills right, I end up taking 2-3 minutes (sometimes even more) on them (barring the really easy ones: i.e., 1-3 difficulty rating). I think converting the sentence into lawgic consumes a lot of the time. As a point of contrast - I was wrapping up the PSA questions within 1:24, and wasn't diagramming for any of those.
Any suggestions on how I can improve my speed?
PS: I didn't print the questions and was drilling directly from the laptop, which meant I couldn't immediately underline key words and diagram. I'm not sure if this was an obstacle in completing the question within the allotted time?
Looking forward to everyone's suggestions!
Hi friends,
I keep having trouble with questions such as #5 section 4 on PT 72 that say something along the lines of "The order of _____ is fully determined if which one of the following is true?"
Any tips on how to solve these? I think I'm really in my own head when it comes to these questions.
Thanks!
Hi guys, Im having trouble setting up this type of game. Not sure where to put what elements, what the elements are and what the base is. Does anyone have any tips? Would reading the advanced linear games in PS help with the set up? Im good once I get to the set up.
I'm a bit confused about the technical differences between the errors of (1) mistaking sufficiency or necessity and (2) mistaking necessity for sufficiency. I realize the instances in which the errors arise may be different (i.e. mistaken negation and mistaken reversal, respectively), but aren't the 2 mistakes essentially the same error described in two different ways? If you were to switch the necessary and sufficient conditions of a conditional statement (mistaken reversal) would you not be able to describe the error using either one of those descriptions?
Hello fellow 7Sage students! I am taking the December LSAT and wanted to see who else is, and if you wanted to form a study group! I am aiming for a 155-158, but I welcome all that are really serious about getting it done the next few months! Who's with me?
Pretty much what the title says. It feels like everything I learned went down the drain. I'm trying very hard not to panic for the test in less than two weeks. How can I get back on track?
I am consistently getting NA questions wrong. Any advice? I find them very hard.
So I've been at the LSAT for over a year now. I've struggled and plateaued. I've wanted to give up, I've felt motivated and defeated. The September test is right around the corner so I wanted to prove something to myself. I sat down and took my original diagnostic test again. I took this test in May of 2016. It's been over a year since I touched this material.
PT 63
May 2016 score: 151
September 2017 score: 174
While I know there are some factors here, like memory, the feeling of seeing pure progress is amazing.
If you want a confidence boost before the September test, and you are okay with retaking a test, I say give this a shot. It really helped me see that some of my work is at least paying off haha. Just a thought for my fellow September testers out there!