Here's the link to the question: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-36-section-3-question-20/

Okay. I'm confused why (A) is incorrect. Isn't the stimulus just an instance of us evaluating legislation... that is, aren't we determining whether or not legislation that would limit TV programs is more (or less) harmful than the consequences of us not doing so?

Furthermore, in the stimulus, we definitely do consider the consequences of not passing the legislation...

Dear all,

LSAT has become my new drug now. And what JY had said, RC has become especially addictive. As such, I am more desperate to score high on this section. So here are my learning lessons for the 2nd week of learning. And please feel free to share your opinions.

1) Concentration. You must concentrate when you are reading the passage. The number of questions that you answer correctly will be a direct reflection of your concentration. Likewise, this concentration extends all the way to answer questions.

2) Interest. I find that most of the times, you don't have to be interest in the topic but the way that the author is composing his/her point. I have found a way for myself to generate interest by playing what I call a "game of inspectors", meaning that I am always trying to find MP, connections, strong terms, reference, examples....And in general, I believe that every passage is a carefully designed maze and it is game that I have to get good at.

3) Structure. When reading, always ask the question, why the author puts this here and now. There is always a reason. And rarely I find them do it because they intended to be confusing.

4) Reading notes. Don't write like crazy next to the passage. A word or two. I find the fact that you are pushing the brain to process the information actually does a better job for later paragraph recall.

5) But do put in arrows or numbers (link to pt 4). Often times, there is some logical relationship, like the one that I just did, of something that relates with serotine and carb craving. That passage is crazy about A cause B cause C cause D that sort of stuff and when this happens, draw the arrow on the passage and not write a reading note.

6) Track referential phrasing. When the author uses "it", "that"...you have to be able to mark it and track it back. This a fraction of a second thing helps to do 2 things: 1) keeps the structure in constant check, 2) more recall and brain processing

7) Answering. If it is a easier question and you can smell it, just circle it. Or else, do process and elimination. And when it comes the time when you are 2/5 and tries to make a final decision, just believe your gut feeling.

8) Keep learning the passage in the answer choice. I find this especially helpful when doing harder passages. The answer choices do helps you make a double check on your understandings. So you can revise your initial map. So let's say you are doing question 4 and now you find the map is wrong and the question 1 answer needs to be revised, then do it. The questions are just another more targeted "tool" for you.

9) Enjoy the process. Feel the process and actually enjoy. Once you are able to break all the things down, then you are able to feel how sophisticated that the writer is. And often times, these writings are highly sophisticated. This attitude will snowball and get you to the next passage and the next and the next. And then you get addicted like me and just want to do another RC.

While I am only 2nd week into RC, I am constantly meditating on this as RC is not about reading.

Please share with me of your learnings. I be much appreciated.

Thanks,

Panda

This is probably a dumb question - but I've been studying logic games by buying the LSAT preptests (usually in the 10 tests book form), photocopying them and doing the questions on the photo copied version. But I feel like there isn't a lot of space because I've seen some old 7Sage printouts (from the live commentary videos) that seem to have a ton of workspace. Is there a difference between how the 10 New Preptests books look compared to how the test looks day-of?

Holy smokes, did I get rekt on this RC. I normally average between -1 to -4 on RC sections, but this one was -7 and by far my worst PT in over a month. I did fine on blind review for the other sections, but I really struggled with time on this last passage and would love some help on the last question in particular.

27: Which one of the following is most analogous to the process, described in the last paragraph, by which the spread of thistles can be curtailed?

On the actual run-through, I was scrambling for time and guessed E - I eliminated C fairly quickly because none of the methods for combating thistle growth in the passage seemed remotely analogous to voter suppression. I eliminated D because similarly, I didn't see any part of the restoration method as similar to attacking the things supporting thistle growth (which I interpreted as, for example, heavy use of fertilizers). I didn't have time to work through the other choices, so I went with E because the two factions sounded somewhat similar to the two kinds of organisms mentioned in the last paragraph.

On blind review, I figured that while the researchers did conclude a diversity of both kinds of organisms was effective in restoring the native species (and thereby curtailing the spread of thistles), a diversity of disease organisms and beneficial organisms did not necessarily indicate an antagonistic relationship - in fact, it seemed to be the opposite upon closer examination of the text. I eliminated E as well.

At this point, I was trying to decide between A and B, and went with A because thought the last sentence of the passage, specifically "...if beneficial microorganisms are "sown" systematically into the soil along with a wide variety of native plant seeds" was somewhat analogous to tipping the balance of organisms from mostly "bad" to a perhaps more even balance of "good" organisms.

Obviously, this was still incorrect. I think I'm probably misinterpreting which specific parts of the last paragraph are analogous to the voter scenarios mentioned, but I'm having a hard time reasoning out what the "candidates" are supposed to be vs. the "journalists."

All in all, this just seemed like a really strange question, and I couldn't really remember seeing one like it in any prior PTs.

As a side note, I think this might be my inaugural post, but I've been lurking on these forums for a bit over a month and a half (I'm taking the December exam) and have found everyone to be tremendously helpful and kind. Cheers!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-65-section-3-passage-4-passage/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-65-section-3-passage-4-questions/

Can someone diagram the logic of this question? I don't see where the latter part of answer choice A can be inferred from the stimulus?.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-54-section-4-question-09/

Hey guys been MIA, trying to get ready to move out of the country & all... but my question is... what websites do you know of that can help with reading comprehension? I can't really get a subscription to anything as I will not be here... but I was wondering if you knew of any websites I could possibly read daily? My reading comprehension is strong, but until I am not missing a single question every time I always have room for improvement :) Thanks guys!

Hey, could someone help explain in detail why A is the correct answer choice? I am still lost. Thank you.

Hello 7Sage!

I have problems for this question.

The question stem mentions the preference in Passage A:

Preference for coherence connecting variety, not too simple (pure tone) = not interesting; not too complex = bad

so i'm looking for some kind of in the middle of the spectrum

I choose Answer (A): Preference for white noice when sleeping : not totally silence (pure tone) ; not too loud (too complex)

Answer (B): not knowing why it's matching the preference analogy?

Thanks for your help!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-58-section-2-passage-4-passage/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-58-section-2-passage-4-questions/

Hi all, hope your studies are going well.

Just looking for some tips. I only started studying 2 weeks ago :|

I completed a 1000pg book-LG and a 1000pg book-LR that's it. Also reading The Economist out loud for exercise. I recommend it, some dense articles - different subjects tech/med/politics/economics etc. I performed my first PT 72 and got 140 last week Of course I was only able to complete 1/3 of the questons in allotted time the rest all D's.

- My plan is -

LR

Focus on the question type and practice speed

LG

Practice realizing all available deductions and realizing shortcuts to answer questions, increase speed through repetition and teach my parents different game types over and over and over and over ....

RC

Practice actual PT RC sections, untimed, however speed up constantly until can complete them near 8-9 mins each.

I have another 10 PT to complete 62-71, my plan is to do 5-10 within next two weeks.

My goal is 160.

Any tips or suggestions would really help out.

Best of luck to you. :)

Hey everyone! I just wanted some suggestions or techniques for approaching weakening q's. I'm finding that while timing myself, I take a longer time or I rush when solving weakening questions because I take too long. I average around 1 minute and half, sometimes closer to 2 mins, even on the easier questions. I think it's because I'm trying to reason it out completely (find all alternative assumptions, etc.) However, on blind review my accuracy is pretty good, as I'll usually get all or almost all of them right. Are there any techniques or strategies you guys use in order to increase speed on weakening q's, or even all LR question types? Thanks!

Hey, could someone help explain in detail why A is the correct answer choice? I am still lost. Thank you.

Hi all

I've done only 2 PTs in 70s and just want to do those PTs with weird, rare logic games that threw people off before December.

I know 72 has circular..and what other PTs in 70s have weird games?

Thank you so much! :)

If someone can explain to me why B is correct and C is wrong I would be most appreciative. My thought process is below:

Although dissemination of national security and commercial information should be restricted/prohibited (based on the condition), the spread of scientific information should always be allowed.

A) Yes, this country can distinguish potential competitors or enemies based on the stimulus.

B) If technology is restricted, then the general public does not need that information on public policy issues.

C) I said this one was not a necessary assumption because we have no idea about democratic vs. non democratic countries relative proportion of advancement.

D) This has to be true as the stimulus requires a distinction of scientific information vs commercial and national security.

E) This could be true if MNC uses technology but doesn't share it internationally.

PLEASE HELP!!! I really cannot see why C is wrong and B is correct. Thank you in advance.

Hey guys,

I've been pting for the last month or so for the December LSAT. I have improved immensely in LG and LR because I feel like I've been blind reviewing this sections pretty effectively. I try to blind review RC as well, but I don't feel like my level of understanding in this section has improved much since I started doing PT's.

Does anyone have any advice on how to get the most out of reviewing RC after a PT?

Hey, could someone help explain why E is the correct answer choice? I understand why others are incorrect.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-41-section-3-question-19/

I would appreciate if somebody could clarify this one for me..

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-72-section-2-question-14/

Here, JY equates, “Those who ate the most chocolate were the most likely to feel depressed” with “Chocolate Consumption –positively correlated with– Depression”

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-47-section-1-question-26/

Here, JY says “Ones who improved the most were the ones who learned to write the most automatically” is not establishing a correlation. (because we don't know what happened to the 2nd tier people)

What’s going on?

I have also posted a similar question on the PT 72 S2 Q14 down in the comment..

1. Those who ate the most chocolate were the most likely to feel depressed.

2. The more chocolate one consumed, the more likely he/she felt depressed.

Aren’t these two different in meaning? Because for the first statement we don’t know what happened to the middle/low range chocolate eaters..

But we still translate both of them as..

Chocolate Consumption –positively correlated with– Depression

Thoughts?

Thanks in advance!

A condition stated is "Within each segment, reports are ordered by length, from longest to shortest." For purposes of my question I'd like to emphasize that this condition, like all LG rules, is an absolute rule that must be followed.

We are given no information about the length relation of T to either of W or I. Despite this:

The correct answer to Q1, the typical "acceptable configuration" question, implies T — W (where "—" is the usual notation indicating relative order). If this is a way of providing more information, i.e., another rule, it is unique in my limited experience.

The correct answers to Q5 and Q6 imply T — I.

How can T — W or T — I be required assumptions to answer correctly without our having any information that would support them?

The explanation for this game does not address my question.

Why is (E) wrong, can't seem to wrap my head around it. It seems to be the contrapositive of the last sentence.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-54-section-2-question-25/

How do you diagram "is"/"usually" statements? For example, PT 54 Section 4 Q 22.

"The morally preferable act is usually the one that serves the long term interest. Because of this, businesses often have compelling reasons to execute the morally preferable act."

I halt on these SUfficient assumption questiins because they are not readily diagrammable...

Another one is diagramming causal statements:

"Most friendships begin because someone felt comfortable approaching a stranger"

I am scheduled to write the December 2016 LSAT. I am having some anxiety regarding the photo requirement. In my opinion, the photo fits the requirements. However, the photo was taken with an I-Phone 7 and although it is clear, I am still worried about the particular proctor I may encounter on test day that would say otherwise. I have read various forums and in general, people have have minimal trouble with the proctors accepting their photos.

However, I am worried that I might get that one proctor who gives me grief. Is there any way that an actual LSAC employee can confirm that my photo is acceptable? It is 326 pixels per inch, which is well above the minimum of 72 pixels per inch. If by chance that the photo is not accepted, can I bring a professionally taken passport photo as well as my passport and driver's licence as "back up."

I have read some horror stories regarding proctors who are uninformed about LSAC rules and turn students away or who also unnecessarily turn students away for minutiae that they deem unacceptable, in a pathetic attempt to exercise power. People who are taking the LSAT are usually under immense stress and have likely spent a good amount of money applying to law schools and paying LSAC registration fees. LSAC should make more concerted efforts so that the proctors (who are not LSAC employees) do not make arbitrary, subjective judgment calls. Honestly, the previous requirement of having a passport taken and then attached as a physical copy to the LSAT ticket was a much better option, in my opinion. The fact that they base so much on "the proctor's discretion" is just ridiculous to me. Can anyone share their experiences regarding the photo requirement? Is anyone else stressed about this or am I just being nuts?!

hey guys, just wanted to share with you how i've been drilling LR recently and let you know that so far it has been paying off.

i'm sure its nothing ground breaking and has certainly been done before, but it has helped me anticipate the answer choices :) -- it occurred to me after hearing Johnathan say that he never uses POE to get to the answer choices...

http://imgur.com/wFQnSGE

The lesson Logic Games Habits for Speed and Accuracy says about re-writing rules in visual language: "Write out rules neatly, close to each other, numbered [emphasis added]."

I have been wondering why JY always numbers his re-written rules. I've not seen any use made of the numbers that helps to answer questions. I can see occasional convenience of reference when, in talking to us watchers of the video explanations, JY deletes or combines or uses a rule. But I'm not as yet seeing a reason for me to number my rules.

Hi Everyone,

These questions are some of the most time consuming in LR, and there are many people in the LSAT community who advocate using certain techniques for eliminating answer choices on these questions quickly. These techniques include strategies like: matching the strength of the conclusion (qualifier words), the type of reasoning (conditional, causation, etc.), and other qualifier words such as most, some, all, etc.

However, I've noticed that in recent exams (70's), LSAC has made these questions (even!) more difficult and time consuming by including all of these features in most of the answer choices. (For example, if the stimulus uses "probably" in the conclusion, 4 out of 5 answer choices will all include the word "probably" too.) As a result, they've eliminated some of the 'quick and easy' tells that we had at our disposal to move through these questions faster.

Has anyone else noticed this trend? If so, what other techniques/shortcuts do you use in order to cut through the problem and eliminate wrong answers quickly?

Thanks!

I am not sure why answer choice D in question 68 section 3 of PT 68 is incorrect. Here is an explanation for why I think D can be considered the correct answer.

I made 3 assumptions about parallel reasoning questions which I would like to explain with aid of the following (flawed) reference argument:

Premises: 1. A --> B

2. A --> C

Conclusion: B -->C

Assumption 1) Contrapositives are permitted and do not change the structure of parallel reasoning question. For example, the following argument would be considered parallel to the reference argument:

Premises: 1. not B --> not A (this is a contrapositive of A --> B)

2. A --> C

Conclusion: not C --> not B (this is a contrapositive of B --> C)

Assumption 2) Swapping a given variable with its negation at every single occurrence of the said variable does not change the structure of the argument. This is because any variable can be redefined to be the negated version of its original definition. For instance, instead of defining D = dog, we can define D = not dog and then swap every single occurrence of D and not D in the argument without affecting its structure.

For example, the following would be considered parallel to the argument stated above (in assumption #1) and thus, by extension, also to the reference argument:

Premises: 1. not B --> A

2. not A --> not C

Conclusion: C --> not B

Note that I swapped A and not A as well as C and not C from the example in assumption #1.

3) The positioning of the premises is irrelevant to the structure of the argument and thus swapping them is permissible. For instance, the following argument would be considered parallel to the reference argument:

Premises: 1. A --> C

2. A --> B

Conclusion: B --> C

I just swapped premises 1 and 2 from the reference argument.

Now, onto the question. Here is how I traced out the argument in the stimulus:

Premises: 1. balcony --> fireplace

2. balcony --> no 1-bedroom

Conclusion: 1-bedroom ---> no fireplace

Replacing words with symbols in the above argument:

Premises: 1. A --> B

2. A --> no C

Conclusion: C ---> no B

Swap C and no C (assumption #2):

Premises: 1. A --> B

2. A --> C

Conclusion: no C ---> no B

Take contrapositive of conclusion (assumption #1):

Premises: 1. A --> B

2. A --> C

Conclusion: B --> C (contrapositive of no C ---> no B)

Analysis of flaw: one necessary condition leads to another necessary condition. I am going to look for parallel of this in the answer choice.

Now, onto answer choice D. Here is how I traced out the argument in the answer choice:

Premises: 1. cat --> no dog

2. dog --> no fish

Conclusion: cat ---> fish

Take contrapositive of premise #1 and conclusion (assumption #1):

Premises: 1. dog --> no cat (contrapositive of cat --> no dog)

2. dog --> no fish

Conclusion: no fish ---> no cat (contrapositive of cat --> fish)

Swap premises #1 and #2 (assumption #3):

Premises: 1. dog --> no fish

2. dog --> no cat

Conclusion: no fish ---> no cat

Change to symbols:

Premises: 1. A --> no B

2. A --> no C

Conclusion: no B ---> no C

Swap B with no B and C with no C (assumption #2):

Premises: 1. A --> B

2. A --> C

Conclusion: B ---> C

Eureka!!! Exact same structure as the stimulus.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-68-section-3-question-24/

JY has said that the target completion times shown under the explanation videos are for those who aspire to -0 or -1 per section (I think he intends section score rather than individual game score), and that students who are not yet adepts should expect longer times.

I've just been working on PT 61 S3 G4. I did the game cold and took more than 15 minutes with -1. Then I watched JY's explanation, admired it as usual, and noted that the target time annotation is 10 minutes for this "very hard" game and JY said at the start of the video that it took him a little over 9 1/2 minutes. Then I re-did the game; with no significant delays it took me 13:25 and I was -0. By "significant" I mean more than 5-10 seconds. It took me almost four minutes longer than JY said it took him. What's going on here?

One thing that's going on is that I am quite pessimistic about being able to finish four games on the upcoming Dec. 3 test.

I would love to see a video of JY (or anyone) solving a difficult LG cold in approximately the listed target time. Are there any of those?