Discussions

LSAT

New post

310 posts in the last 30 days

I am having hell of a hard time figuring this one out; I have 3 issues here:

If the press were not profit making the only alternative is subsidy and with it outside control

1)I was thinking: NOT profit making------> Subsidy and Outside control

but then I remembered "the only" is group 1 indicator and I changed my diagram to:

Subsidy and Outside control--------> NOT profit making

and of course this does not lead to the right answer choice...

2) what's up with that AND? which one is right?

Not Profit Making--------> Subsidy & outsideControl

or

NOT profit making--------> Subsidy--------> Outside control

and then link either with Subsidy -------->NOT honest Journalism

3) Am I making this harder that what it actually is? I keep diagraming LR questions...

0

hi,

I dont understand why E is wrong...it says the citys mayor requested so they invested in computermodeling technology right?

if the mayor was not a proponet they would not request it...I thought. any ideas? :(

Is it bc of the part *because of* ? so we dont know if its because of that reason mentioned in E...but could be other reasons?

thank you in advance.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-64-section-1-question-18/

0

Hi all,

So I know "a few" is logically equivalent to "some" (more than 1), but for "few," can we say that it is logically equivalent to the opposite of "most"? An example would best show what I mean:

1. A few cats are blue. (Some cats are blue.)

2. Few cats are blue. (Most cats are NOT blue.)

Is this correct?

Thank you! Just a small nit picky logic thing that I keep forgetting to confirm.

0

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-71-section-1-question-24/

I can't understand why answer choice 'B' is incorrect! Need some help!

The flaw of the argument is that it assumes there is no other reason that a child could have sleeping problems. Thus the conclusion that "removing the tonsils eliminates sleeping problems" rests on this assumption.

Answer choice 'E' is exactly that.

On second look however answer choice 'B' is exactly that as well.

The argument certainly relies on the assumption that there is (no other reason a child could have sleeping problems) than from the tonsils which is "tantamount to making the conclusion true." Answer choice 'B' even matches up 100% with my explanation!

What's more is that answer E and B when compared to each other support each other as well. Example:

"(B)relies on the assumption" that there "(E)is no other cause for sleeping problems during sleep"

Have looked all over but I can't find any explanation on this. Thanks for any help in advance.

0

Hi all! I have been studying for about two months now and initially had started out using the Powerscore Bibles but after about a month and a half I realized that their approach to the LSAT was just simply not for me nor was I a fan of their explanation methods but that's besides the point. Anyway, I purchased the 7sage course about two weeks ago and I love it! I certainly think that this is a much better approach for study and will complete the course with pretty high confidence that I will receive the score I want.

However, I believe I made the mistake of registering too early. I am currently registered to take the September LSAT and the deadline for postponing is August 30th and I am just not sure if I will be ready yet, or if I want to rush through the 7sage course to make myself ready by September. Before registration, I already had my mind up about taking it twice so I am definitely going to be taking it in December but do you think September is too early for me right now and that I should postpone? The only reason I am still contemplating postponing is that I don't want to only take the exam once (I have heard taking it twice is the way to go to ensure your maximum score) and I don't want to push back my second time taking it to February because I think February is too late. Overall, I am simply not sure what I should do. Any advice?

0

With the September LSAT knocking on the front door, I planned a week of vacation away from work about 2 weeks before the exam, with the goal of reducing any work-related stress to have better focus. What is the best plan of attack for September studying? Do a few PTs, but nothing too new? Focus on fine tuning reading comprehensive (my lowest scoring area)? Go on vacation, get a great tan, and try not to think about it?

0

This is lesson 6/16 in the Advanced Logic Section. On DeMorgans law. Question 1. Translate the sentence into logic.

"Unless the leather is soaked and tanned for 3 days, the resulting boot will be smelly."

The right answer is

/S or /T ---> BS

contrap: /BS ---> S & T

Why does it turn from an “and” to an “or” statement if you choose /S & /T as the sufficient condition?

I thought that for “unless” conditionals, you just pick one statement and negate it and that’s the sufficient.

I’m choosing S & T as the sufficient, and BS as the necessary.

so

/S & /T —> BS

If the leather isn’t soaked and tanned, the boot will be smelly.

so the contrapositive would be…

/BS –> S or T

If the boot isn’t smelly, the leather was soaked or tanned.

I see that I’m wrong but I don’t understand why.

Is it just..whenever an & statement is negated, it turns into an or statement? and whenever an or statement is negated it turns into an & statement?

I’m super confused bc now I’m looking at the contrapositive of #2 on that quiz and it’s /S & /H —> E or D

If "and" statements turn into "or" statements when they’re negated then why isn’t that the case here >.<

P.S. I do know the splitting rules it's just hard to type onto here so I left it without splits.

0

This is a principle question.

I'm actually completely lost on this one.

I thought the principle to be extracted from the stimulus was somewhere along the lines of, in order to gain acceptance for a theory, there needs to be some evidence to support the ideas expounded in the theory.

The reason I thought this was because even though scientists did not find such a force as evidence, new instruments allowed continental movement to be confirmed by observation which I thought acted as evidence.

A) No idea what to make of this or do with this

B) Doesn't do anything to the argument. In this particular theory science has not identified the force, so this answer choice is irrelevant.

C) This I think could be considered irrelevant, this changes the scope of the argument. Measuring instruments appear to make theories harder to work out, what does that have to do with the stimulus? Absolutely nothing.

D) Science is concerned with mass behavior, ok, but what does mass behavior have to do with a force that can make the continents move? Nothing. I think this is irrelevant.

E) This is the correct answer. I can see how this could be correct because there is no explanation for the posited theory, yet the evidence is there/detected.

I guess if someone could explain why A is wrong and why E is correct that would be great. I was really confused with this question.

0

I ran into this on a Principle question. I diagrammed it as a unless condition, I was not completely sure though and really nervous about it.

Is it the same as either or/or not both? I looked in my notes for the group 1-4 lessons and I didn't find it in there.

0

Hi,

I'm on my study break and well..... bored.

I figured at this point you've decided that you are going to take it or you aren't sooooo how many people on 7sage are taking the September LSAT? And where? Maybe people can meet up with each other before and/or after the test! On that note, I am taking mine at Brooklyn College (I think?.. I should probably check...).

Oh and 39 more days. Enjoy!

0

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-67-section-3-game-4/

I was not sure about the question sentence...it says "If three subzones in all are designated for retail use and a subzone in Z2 is designated for housing, then which one of the following is allowed?"

But zone1 cannot have R, why it says "If three subzones in all..." I thought it's just impossible...where did I misread the question sentence?

0

I'm having hard time to solve substitution Qs like PT58,S2,Q12 and PT59,S1,Q10.

Is there any effective tactic to crack this kind of the Qs?

Please someone enlighten me.

Thanks in advance!

0

Hi, So I was wondering what is the best strategy to adopt for bubbling the answers on the answer sheet for the LR section? Is it best to bubble per question, or once you've solved all questions on both the open pages, or after having solved all questions possible in the entire section? This may sound trivial, but I have been experimenting with different strategies and they have a not so insignificant impact on my timing. Just wanted to know what works best for most people and if there is a consensus on which one to follow.

0

When you see a conditional statement in either the stimulus or the answer choice, do you always translate to the contrapositive to check if it matches your pre-phrase? I noticed that I almost never translate to the contrapositive, and that may be why I get hard sufficient assumption questions wrong. It seems like you HAVE to translate to the contrapositive because that's how the test designers make it more difficult.

A good example is PT73, S2, Q12. The correct answer as well as the most tempting have to be translated to the contrapositive to fill the gap, and the translation also gets at the nuance in their differences.

What does everyone think?

0

This is a Method of Reasoning question.

I really need help in understanding why answer choice C is wrong. I understand why A is correct and why the other ones are wrong, my reasoning is below:

A) The premise is more people would put money in their savings accounts, the challenge is the past initiative with money being diverted from personal savings and net personal savings remaining unchanged.

B) The disagreement is with the author and a group of policymakers not "among policymakers".

C) I really don't know, this answer choice looks good to me. Isn't the author saying it is more likely to fail because of initiatives in the past did not bring about the change the policymakers desire. Would this answer choice be incorrect because it is too definite?

D) This one can be eliminated because we do not know that this group of policymakers are the same policymakers that advocated the past initiatives. Perhaps they were young kids during that time and not policymakers.

E) The author is not disputing the assumption that a program to encourage personal savings is needed, he is trying to dispute the fact that it will work. He indicates it is not likely to work because of attempts in the past that failed.

0

I don't know about any of you, but RC was my weakest section. I was shocked at this because I am a very good reader. What I have concluded is it was my weakest section because of attitude towards it, not because I don't understand the material. Ever since I changed my attitude about the section, my score improved. I tried really hard to be positive and WANT to do the section, rather than HAVING to do the section. I also tried to steer away from looking at the questions as simply questions and I started to look at it is as more of figuring out a puzzle ( answering the questions is putting the puzzle together). I found I was better able to interact with the passage and the questions.

Maybe I am actually just going insane, but I think attitude is everything.

Happy studying you smarties :)

1

Confirm action

Are you sure?