Hello! If anyone could clarify where I’m misunderstanding, I would be so grateful!

So the diagram for this is: (B - banker, A - athlete, L - lawyer)

B —> A

L—> /B (the contrapositive would be B —> /L)

—

So you can conclude A (—s—) /L (some athletes are not lawyers- which I believe is the right answer.)

Taking the contrapositive of the first statement is where I have some issues:

/A —> /B

L —> /B

—

/A (—s—) L

And since some is bidirectional, it seems wrongly to read like B (some non-athletes are lawyers or some lawyers are non- athletes)?

I’ve found my RC scores often depend on how quickly I’m able to complete “easy” passages. Is there a general time you high RC scorers aim for when it comes to the easiest passages? I feel like I should be able to do them in around 5 minutes but typically it takes around 6:30.

I did not initially choose C because the professor never rejected the reasoning in the argument. He simply says that the reasoning should be “discounted”. Am I being too pedantic in this case?

Admin Note: Edited title. For LR questions, please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

Hello,

I have reached the final logical reasoning question type: parallel or analogy. This question type has highlighted how much I struggle with mapping out formal logic. It isn't necessarily that I don't understand the principles, but rather, where to begin? Once I watch the explanation video and see the first step, I am able to fully understand how to continue, it's just the initial step.

Furthermore, I especially struggle with identifying all of the different logical reasoning ploys, i.e., reason by analogy, appeal to authority, sample to population generalization, and so on.... It seems like there are so many different subtypes that it's difficult to remember them all. Does anyone have a cheat sheet which simply explains all of these niche logical reasoning tactics?

Thanks so much,

Sav

to drill LR in full sections

For this question I picked A, and then B for final. I now know that A is the right answer, but I want to be sure that I understand why I had gotten this wrong.

For a short recap, Oscar's conclusion is "Thus a country's economic well-being will not be a function of its geographical position but just a matter of its relative success in incorporating those new technologies". Here I am thinking okay cool well-being is determined:

Geographical Position --> Incorporating those new technologies

Now for Sylvia, they counter this because they say that it is due to the poor country (the south as mentioned by Oscar), is not able to acquire the $$$ to incorporate the tech. They conclude by saying that it will only "widen the existing economic gap between north (rich) and south (poor)".

So going into the questions, I chose B because I thought that since the poor countries didn't have $$$ for implementation that it would cause the gap. However, I see that A was right because widening the gap meant that the rich prolly wouldn't know how rich they were unless the poor were some amount of poor? However, what does "natural resources" in A mean? Could it mean economic? Oil? I believe that was a part of what tripped me up, but I believe another was the assumption that I made which didn't allow for me to truly grasp Sylvia's conclusion.

Anyone have any suggestions when going into these questions? Or ways that I can improve in NA?

I was consistently getting -2 on my PTs and after the April exam, I can't seem to get a PT with an RC score higher than -7. Any advice about how to get out of this rut (soon hopefully)? Any drilling advice for these next couple of days would be beyond useful!

Does anyone have a LR study guide that I could use that explains the strategy for each question type?

I initially chose C. This is a good trap answer, a very good trap answer indeed. The trap comes when they say that rural people communicate less. The passage talks about communicating ELETRONICALLY less, not communicating less in general. If you read this quickly, it makes perfect sense. Rural people communicate less electronically, so answer C is correct. However, because answer C is missing electronically, it is wrong. This is very sneaky!!!

Answer A is a classic difficult answer. It perfectly summarizes, which is the job of a good principle answer, but it does so in verbose language that is different from the passage.

Answer B is irrrelevant and introduces new information

Answer D is irrelevant and introduces new information,

Answer E is irrelevant and introduces new information

Watch out! Trap answers are very sneaky!

Admin Note: Removed PT questions. Please do not post the entire question and answer choices for the LSAC question. This is copyrighted content and is against the Forum Rules.

Is there a diagnostic test you can take if you plan to take the LSAT in August 2024 or onward from there? Or should I take an old test that still has the LG section?

Hello 7Sagers!

I'm looking for some tips to help improve my reading comprehension score. I am currently scoring around -12 which is of huge concern given I take my second LSAT in January. While practice is, of course, key to improving my RC score, I need to see lots of improvement in a relatively short amount of time. At present, I seem to be struggling the most with my speed. I take too long answering the questions, which indicates to me that I need to spend more time analyzing the passage. Perhaps some tips on low resolution summaries might help? Any insights would be greatly appreciated!

hi, guys!

if possible, i'm looking for some advice - thank you so much in advance :) i have taken the LSAT four times and canceled one of my scores last october due to extenuating circumstances.

my fourth score, the nov. 2023 LSAT, is much lower (:/) than my highest score and i'm worried would put me in a disadvantageous position considering that i'm applying this application cycle, which i was planning to in the next couple of days but hadn't expected this. considering that i already have one score cancellation on my record, do you think that also cancelling my nov. 2023 LSAT score would be harmful to my application?

any and all thoughts are appreciated!!!

Hello!

I was wondering if we took the LSAT this June and submitted a writing sample, will we have to write a new writing sample for the August 2024 exam? (Since the format is changing a little bit)

I am slightly confused as to how Q22 = AC: C?

Doesn't C leave the possibility of

1.) Network to U to P to T to S to T to R to Q

or

2.) Network to T to S to U to P to T to R to Q

?

I write on Saturday, someone please let me know ASAPPP!#help

For example if in the stimulus the conditional statement is A->B can the right answer be /B->/A? or does it need to take the original form?

Hi Can you please give me some tips for the writing sample, I need Some advice!

I never really fully understood what understanding how to approach the question means could someone clarify this for me?

Hi everyone. I have noticed significant improvement over the course of my studies with LG due to foolproofing, especially with my initial set ups, nailing inferences as well as my confidence!

However, I am still making stupid mistakes here and there on the actual questions, especially during timed practice.

Will more foolproofing help out or is that more relevant for finding inferences?

I assume I will get more accurate consistently by drilling, which I am currently doing, but any advice would be helpful!

I'm adding my explanation to this question since it doesn't currently exist on 7sage. Feel free to critique my reasoning.

This is a necessary assumption question. We know this because the question stem says the argument above makes which one of the following assumptions? The correct AC must be an assumption we know the argument makes. Therefore, it is a necessary assumption.

P: R bacteria provide nitrogen to bean plants and other legumes. Nitrogen is an essential plant nutrient. Wheat must normally be supplied nitrogen by nitrogen fertilizer.

C: If technology produces wheat strains that will host R bacteria, the need for fertilizers will be reduced.

Flaw: I originally thought but what if nitrogen is not the only essential plant nutrient for plants to grow? Might the need for fertilizer remain? B plays on this erroneous understanding. This isn't the actual flaw.

A. 'should' is irrelevant. This is not about what should happen it's about what is/will happen.

B. This was temping and it the trap answer choice. The conclusion says the need for artificial fertilizers will be reduced if biotech succeeds in producing wheat strains who host R bacteria. What about other reasons growers need to add fertilizer? Can we conclude from no longer needing nitrogen that fertilizer demand in general will be reduced? Even if nitrogen only comprises a small subset of all fertilizer use, if we eliminate the nitrogen need, then yes, the fertilizer demand will be reduced. This is true even if nitrogen is not the only soil nutrient that must be supplied. The key word to not falling for this trap answer choice is "reduced." Perhaps I was temped because I was thinking "eliminated." If the conclusion said the demand would be eliminated then yes nitrogen would have to be the only reason growers use fertilizer.

C. This is not necessary. It talks about other grasses but even if it didn't, even if there are strains of wheat that do have R naturally, we know there are some that aren't. That's what the whole argument is about so this is irrelevant.

D. Similar reasoning to C. We don't need legumes to be the only crops that produce nitrogen. We know some wheats don't and we know there is an existing need for nitrogen based fertilizer. The argument is simply saying the need will go down if wheat is modified to host R bacteria.

E. This is absolutely necessary. If the R bacteria did not produce nitrogen in the wheat roots then it wouldn't reduce the need for artificial fertilizer. This is the true flaw. Just because the plant will host the bacteria doesn't mean that it will necessarily have the desired effect.

Hi guys so I review my logic games with the 7 sage videos on Youtube, but something I found I have difficulty with is determining or knowing when to use sub game boards. I have found that sometimes I have made them and they dnt require which confuses me. I try to think that of there is a variable that is limited to 2 or 3 positions to create sub game boards, but this has backfired on me a couple times.I appreciate any help or advice! Thank you

Are there any 7Sage, Reddit or other discussions/tutorials/lessons about translating English to Lawgic?

The Lawgic lessons were so easy for me to grasp. Super easy. Then I watch some LR videos where YC transfers English to Lawgic and it doesn’t click what so ever. On super simple LR questions in the CC I would find the correct answer by simply thinking about the words and what I need to do. I then try to transfer it into Lawgic and my markings are not similar to YC’s. When YC chains multiple things it doesn’t click why a sufficient on one would be the necessary on another.

I’ve noticed many comments in the CC of people also having hard time with common threads of “when do I use Lawgic?” As well as plenty of people that totally dismiss Lawgic except in the hardest of LR questions so it seems I am not alone.

When do you use Lawgic in LR?

Do you consistently transfer English to Lawgic when you do?

Are there any resources you recommend?

Or is this simply experience with trial and error?

I can see a significant benefit by translating English to Lawgic but only if it is consistently accurate.

What are the some online LSAT class courses that you all have taken that worked for you? I took Princeton Review before and it was okay. I'm looking to enroll in a new class coming up for better luck. Please let me know if you have any recommendations

Hi, 7Sage, it's been a wonderful time having used your service, but I want to know what your opinion of adding written out answers to old LR questions is. I have been drilling the old questions, but I cannot help but notice that among the PTs before 16-17, the LR explanations are scant, with exceptions of video explanations. However, the problem with posting videos is that it just takes too much time to review the question: you have to find the explanation of the answer choice that you were curious about. It would be much better if videos plus written out answers are added. Thanks always, 7Sage!

Hey all,

I was kicked out of the virtual exam room eight (8) times during the exam, twice during each section, at roughly 15-20 minute intervals. After the eighth time, the Prometric system said that if I 'abandoned' the test again, I wouldn't be allowed to rejoin and finish it. As a result, I had to rush through the final section and guess on half of the questions just to guarantee that I finished before getting kicked again. I have no idea why it happened. It could have been connectivity issues, but I work from home twice a week with no issues and even upgraded my home internet to 5G before the test specifically for this reason. Regardless of the cause, I was kicked out of the test midsection, forced to rejoin the test, and go through the security/screening process 8 times, which obviously wasn't ideal for doing well. 

It's a long shot, but do you know if I have any options regarding whether I can get this test expunged, retake it, or even take the issue up with LSAC or Prometric? I'm not hopeful of anything, but I'd appreciate any help or advice you all could have. 

The correct choice was B, I selected D. I found this statement really difficult to understand and even my BR took a while to do so if anyone can offer helpful tips on how they approached this question that would be greatly appreciated.

My reason for selecting the answer choice I did was because I made an assumption in the archaeologist's argument, I also confused myself with the grammar inside the stimulus.

This is how I am now understanding the question:

Treasure Hunter: Because of the rule, treasure hunters are entitled to what they retrieve since they are risking their lives. Since the rule applies, the ship is in peril. This condition must be met for the rule to apply.

Archeologist: They are not entitled to what they retrieve, the shipwrecks are stablized, the only danger they are exposed to is that of previous archaeologists and therefore are not in peril (implicitly stated). They are not in peril because for the rule to be met this condition must also be met, in this case it is not.

What they disagree about is whether or not the ship is in peril (B)

TH says this rule can be applied to a sunken ship. Implicitly saying that it is still in peril

A says nothing about the rule and only speaks about whether the treasure hunters are actually entitled to the artifacts or not. But since they are not entitled to the artifacts, the ship is not in peril.

(D) is incorrect because:

TH: agrees with the statement by saying even though they have sunk, treasure hunters are still entitled to what they discover because they risk their lives

A: Though they still risk their lives, they are only risking their lives because of other treasure hunters, not because the ship is in peril. But they make no mention about whether maritime law can be applied