I'm looking to find someone to study regularly with either online or in person for the June LSAT.

Shoot me a message on here!

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.

Want to make sure I'm thinking through this correctly. C is right because it suggests the incorrectness of a premise, that the reason that Peter's actions are more blameworthy than Alicia's. The relevant part of C is just that Peter's running a red light, an illegal action, caused the action that caught the police's attention. I'm struggling to figure out whether the part of C that says that Alicia took extra care to avoid police noticing her contradicts the premise that there's a diff in the blameworthiness. I would argue that it doesn't, but I want to ensure that I've nailed down the important part of the correct answer choice.

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

Necessary condition" Fear of retaliation --> Deter attack/military deterrence

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of question"

Hello

Any suggestions? I am able to get my wanted score only in BR.

On June it will be my 4th attempt.

So I am learning Logical reasoning through the book "The Loophole". So it says that "Your loophole and resolution have to be powerful" and "Your inference and controversy have to be provable" But then when I got to the Provable question stem section it said that the question stems-- conclusion, NA, Method, Argument part, The flaws-- all used loophole. Can someone please explain this? I don't understand.. because the book initially said that loopholes have to be powerful.

Does anyone know where you can practice translating for English to logic for inference questions. For example a bunch of question stems for practice and we translate them to logic.

I don't understand why the answer choice is not A?

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

Where in the stimulus do we find support for the fact that zebra mussels MUST be regarded as hazardous waste if they don't transform the waste products they filter and remove? Answer choices D and E seem really close here.

Admin Note: Please use the format "PT#.S#.Q# (G#) - brief description of question."

The "but" in the first section reveals the author's position on Midville: it is not as expensive as others perceive it to be. The following sentences provide support as to why they believe this is true.

I have been reading and hearing a lot that there are patterns to this. Can someone explain to me what that means? I can see how it relates to LG but confused on the patterns for LR.

An assumption I came up with was: "allowing eggs to decay makes it impossible to use them to analyze for pesticide-bird tests"

Would something along those lines be a viable answer for assumption questions?

Can someone show how to quickly translate/diagram this to make sense in the test? I was between B and C and chose c which is wrong. #help

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question"

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

How can you say what accounts for the best possible ice cream? Doesnt this stray too far from the passage? #help

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question.

Hi! Recently started learning about formal logic and it's kicking my butt to be honest. I'm still a little confused on how you even identify a conditional statement (I was going through some of the exercises and was like seriously, this is a conditional statement?).

More importantly, I'm still a little confused about how to deduce sufficient vs necessary conditions. I don't want to rely solely on indicators as LSAT is a test about understanding. If you guys could share your tips/explain, I would appreciate that so much, thanks!!

Could someone please explain this one?

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of question"

I was wondering if anyone had a mnemonic they like to use to help remember which indicators belong to each group?

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

I'm doing some LR drilling right now, and I just wanted to make a discussion post and share my reasoning for a question (as prompted by 7Sage).

C: the glacier that melted to reveal the ancient body is at least 4,000 years old

Reasoning: Artifacts found on the man's body indicate that he lived at least 4,000 years ago, and that he died on the same spot where his body was discovered. Therefore, the glacier - the spot on which he died and was discovered - must be at least 4,000 years old. None of the other answer choices were even close to enticing and were easily eliminated.

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question"

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

Free will is not applicable in determining responsibility for all situations (its not a one size fit all equation).

We hold criminals responsible bc they cause damage out of free will.

We do not hold drivers (driving while heart attack and cause damage) responsible, even though the heart attack could be prevented from diet (free will).

A. Itself is not a conclusion

BC. Not “Should”

D. Not true

E. Maybe, saying that we do not apply free will equally to all situations (i.e both criminals and drivers under heart attack both stem from free will but they have different outcome).

can someone explain why D is the right answer