Hello! I was hoping to get some clarification on this question.

So clearly our right answer should link the reintroduction of rock salt to a disproportionate burden on low income people.

I put B, and the correct answer is D.

My understanding is that you're supposed to use the part of the prompt that says "Although the city claims that cars are now better protected from salt's corrosive properties than they were as recently as five years ago" to pair with the text D, which says that low income people are more likely to purchase older vehicles.

My issue is that I think not a large leap, but a nonsensical leap to interpret the prompt portion as referring to new cars in comparison with old cars. The text merely says that "cars are now better protected from salt's corrosive properties." There's literally one subject in that sentence: cars. The sentence makes no distinction about different groups of cars within the general "cars" umbrella. The distinction, grammatically and logically speaking, is between how "cars" handle salt now, and how "cars" handled salt before.

Maybe "cars" better handle salt because of some trends in humidity levels. Heck, you could just as easily and fairly interpret the opposite of what you were meant to. Maybe the older a car is, the more resistant it becomes to salt corrosion because they develop a layer of dirt and debris that keeps the salt from penetrating as deeply as it does in new cars which are exposed.

Deriving the necessary assumption is ludicrous and arbitrary, in my view.

On the contrary, D requires but a small, feasible leap. We're told that sales tax disproportionately burdens low income people. We're told that road maintenance is primarily funded by local sales tax. This appears to have all the ingredients we need to make a perfectly in-tact chain of logic. All we have to do is check to see if rock salt re-introduction counts as road maintenance.

Rock salt is applied to roads in order to maintain a safe, drivable road. It is undoubtedly a road maintenance matter. We weren't using it for several years, we are now. Sure, maybe we have a vast reservoir of rock salt in an underground bunker that will spare us any additional expense, but that's terribly farfetched and extreme. At the very least you're going to have some costs associated with the switch, if not also the highly likely case that you're going to have to buy some quantity of rock salt, the money of which is coming from sales tax that disproportionately burdens low-income people.

B seems to be all but iron clad, while D is all but impossible. We need but the smallest, likeliest set of circumstances for B to work. We need the biggest, most ridiculous, most ambiguous crapshoot of an assumption in order for D to make a drop of sense.

Am I missing something here?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-67-section-4-question-08/

Okay guys, I need your help figuring out my next step.

I have finished CC, Manhattan LR and Trainer and I do believe that I have a very strong sense of LR arguments and question stems. My strategy was to do LR from PTs 17-36 untimed and really take my time to analyze the questions. So far I did 17-19 and my average is -6.5 per section. I need to bring it down to at most -2 and I do not know how to achieve it.

The way I did the questions that I did was to

Now two things happen 1) either i am down to two answer choices (most of the time one of them is correct) and i pick the wrong one because somehow in my head i overthink it and all of the sudden it becomes somehow attractive or 2) i do not read careful enough and misread the right answer in a way that it becomes a wrong answer, so even though i take my time to understand the argument, i rush with understanding the answer choices.

My question is, should I stick with my strategy and keep going with the rest of the PTs in hope that after enough bumps along the way I will be able to learn better what my weaknesses are and spot the wrong answer choices easier?

Should I employ a different strategy?

P.S there is not one specific kind of questions I miss the most. I am pretty decent at all of them according to 7sage trends, with SA and Flaw being my best and Strengthen, AP and MBT being the worst.

I'm taking the Sept exam and was wondering how I can get better at deciding whether to split the game board, solve by brute force or just make a basic diagram and move on to the questions. I usually rush towards the end because I spend too much time trying to split the game board or too little time making inferences. How do you guys approach different problem sets? I kind of have to get -0 in order to get the score I need...

Hey all.

I've noticed the more recent exams have a lot of difficult necessary assumption questions. Another thing I noticed was that these questions frequently have conditional statements as wrong answer choices, while the right answer choice is most often just a direct statement.

If I'm choosing between two good sounding ACs on a PT, but one is conditional and the other is a direct statement, do you all think the direct statement is more likely to be true?

It seems to me that the conditional statements are very often sufficient assumption answer choices, while the direct statements are necessary.

Thanks

Hey all,

I was wondering what you all were planning on doing the week before the exam. As of now I think I'm going to PT on Monday and Wednesday, then just light drilling/taking the day off Thursday and Friday.

Also, was wondering if anyone had some helpful tips on relieving mental exhaustion or eye fatigue post-PT?

Hey Guys,

I always get confused when we have a group 3 and 4 word. For instance, PT 69, part 4, question 21, answer choice D.

So, we have /published AND important and well written (The published is negative and crossed out)

How would I take it from here since we have unless and not. I went through the lessons, and it said I can make either one negative. So I will make published positive and keep important and well written. So this answer choice would read.. if published----> is important and well written.

Is this correct?

I have a fantastically hard time with these question types. I attribute it to a lack of complete understanding of the passage content. But even during BR i still get these wrong.

Any pointers or tips on how you guys go about these?

My BR score is generally 178-180. This is literally the only thing i consistently get wrong.

(Bar those annoying LG substitution questions, ugh)

I have the impression that passages 3/4 tend to be more difficult than 1/2 - does anyone know if this is the case? Or am I just projecting because I tend to be stressing out as the clock runs by this time?

If 3 & 4 are, in fact, more difficult, would anyone recommend doing them first? Then going back and hitting 1& 2?

Hi,

I'm pretty comfortable with the RC passages about science as I've watched JY's lessons about finding the opposing arguments, hypothesis, evidence, theory, low to high res annotations. Just wondering if there are any tips specific to passages about old Art as well? Because the LSAT puts a lot of passages about 14th century art or something like that.

Does anyone have a simple Framework/Diagramming approach to Math-type questions that you can rely on? This is for questions like those found in PT 31, Sect 2, Ques 15 (31, 2, 15) or those found at these locations as well: 27, 4, 14; 21, 2, 10; 34, 3, 21? Thanks for any tips/pointers!

In JYs video explanations, he says that the last 2 aren't applicable to the modern lsat. Given what the exam has been up to in recent years on logic games, do you think that statement still stands? I went -4 in this section and usually do -0/-1 so it threw me for sure.

Hello 7sagers! This is my first time posting on the forum so bear with me. I am currently working on some PTs and my max is 160, but for the past few exams I exams I have gotten 154, 156, 157, 159, 156 with BRs between 165-169 on each. I was hoping to take the test in September, but I will probably cancel my score if I do and take it in December instead. I analytics are as follows: at best I get from -4 to -7 on RC (which I'm really proud of b/c RC was my worst section at the ve). On LG -8 on literally every single PT I have taken. On LR I'm usually -8 to -6 per section. Here's the annoying part and what I mainly want advice on: the questions I miss for LR are evenly distributed. So I'll miss two between 1-10 three or four between 11-20 (and often they're in a row) and only one or two between 20-26. I'm not sure what the cause is. I think I'm overconfident on the easy ones and not confident enough in the middle. Has anyone else experienced this? How do I overcome this

Also: I have decided that over the next 2 weeks I am solely going to work on foolproofing games. If I can manage to get between -0--3 on games -4 on RC and, then hammer out my problems on LR I feel confident in my ability to get a 168+ by December.

Thanks for listening y'all let me know what you think. Good luck to all of you taking it in September

So for this one I was having a lot of trouble because I couldn't see how any of the answers could be true based off the stimulus. Can someone explain this question to me please? Ty!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-79-section-1-question-20/

LG is by far my worst section, I can probably get through 2 games.

I'm on a mission to do a TON of games before Sept but I am discouraged. I just don't think theres enough time to fool proof that many games.

I should have spent more of my time on LG..... :( Just venting ya'll this some serious baloney

Hey all! I find that often during BR for LR I am still stuck between 2 answers, so I'm wondering what everyone does to try and push through to the correct answer choice while in BR. Do you look up an explanation of the question/JYs video without looking at the answer or look through your notes for help? Or do you just push through without looking at other sources?

But if anyone has any tips on how they BR LR that would be awesome to know as I find BR LR very tiring haha!

Thanks everyone!!

I have had some major struggles with weakening questions lately. After drilling this question type, I realized that weakening questions simply state the flaw in the argument. Because of this, would it be a bad approach to find the flaw in the argument and, rather then descriptively describing it, anticipate this flaw as an answer choice that exposes it?

Thank you for reading!

Does the statement "Most useful" connote that there is more than one AC that could help but we are tasked at finding the most useful?. If this is painfully obvious, i apologize. But i have learnt to not take anything for granted on this test. Thanks

Nathaniel

So im going deeper and deeper into concepts and working on cookie cutters. Is there any situation where it would be appropriate to assume a cause from a correlation?

Ok, I'm at the end of my rope.

It's reached the point where i'm asking the Starbucks employees. I have NO IDEA why C is correct and why D is wrong. In fact, I've reread this thing so many times I can recite it. If anyone can help, please do. It's one of the few questions I genuinely do not get. Please point out the part of the passage that supports C before I throw things.

I love each and everyone of you who even try to help me.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-54-section-1-passage-1-passage/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-54-section-1-passage-1-questions/

What are some helpful tips for reading carefully in the LR section while trying to finish all the questions in the allotted time. I understand you should master all question types to help speed up the process, but all that flies out the window once the timer starts

Heya everyone new to 7Sage. My studying is going great, but I don't understand how to apply the diagramming concept to the actual question any suggestions?

Do you first identify where the part in question is located in the stimulus? Is this waste of time?

What's the most efficient way to attack AP Qs?

Hey 7sagers! Happy studying to all.

Throughout the curriculum, JY talked about four LR question types that are usually so formulaic that they can become "freebies". I think he put SA, MBT, PMOR, and PFMOR in this category. I am noticing that these questions, especially when the stimulus seems long and daunting, make me have a mini heart attack lol. I want to overcome this weakness and turn it into a strength.

For those that attack these question types with confidence and accuracy, what did you do to get to that point? I want to redo all problem sets for the question types but don't know what to do aside from that.

Thanks you guys are the best!

Cheers,

CP

Hey all.

I did PT 71 today and ran into some rule substitution questions. I've found these questions to either be really easy (intuitive) or really hard, without there really being a middle ground. Like J.Y. said in his video on Rule Substitution questions, a lot of the times it feels like I just get it or I don't.

On PT 71, I didn't really get it. I narrowed it down to two answer choices. This time I decided to take a more systematic approach.

I redrew my entire game board substituting for the new rule to see if I got the same inferences.

This method got me to the right answer, but I will say it took A LOT of time, more than I think was worth it (felt rushed the rest of the section).

Does anyone have more efficient systematic approaches to these types of questions? Or should I just train myself to be faster and redrawing the game board? Or should I just guess lol?

Does anyone know if LSAC has banned the Perfect Score Watch? I am aware that recently they had banned certain watches so I just wanted to be sure.

https://www.amazon.com/Perfect-Score-Watch-Version-LSAT/dp/B073Z8GG32/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1504313129&sr=8-1&keywords=perfect+score+watch