Discussions

LSAT

New post

209 posts in the last 30 days

Hey guys! Just wanted to ask what you think the best resources for Logical Reasoning are out there. I would especially like to work on parallel reasoning/ flaw, and logic heavy questions (they tend to slow me down when I diagram them). I have read the LR Bible, seen the 7Sage videos, and done PTs. Thank you!

0

So, I've been taking LSAT courses and studying everyday for hours on end in preparation for my October exam. I took my 2nd diagnostic exam and did worse than my 1st exam. I figured because more than half of the LR questions were type 2 and 3 (strengthen/weaken) and I'm still having difficulty grasping the concept. I understand what it's asking, but am finding it so hard to get to the correct answer choice. Can someone please help me? In dire need, thank you!

[Admin note: edited thread title for clarity of question type. Originally "type 2 and 3 questions".]

0

In recent PTs (60 onwards), I've been averaging -1 or -2 per LG section and I usually have 1-4 extra minutes after completing all of the games. With that extra time, I try and re-do questions that I think I may have gotten wrong. However, I'm just guessing and I'm trying to figure out a better way of being able to pinpoint exactly where I've made mistakes. Does anyone have advice on this? I would hate to make some mistakes I could've easily fixed, but never identified on test day.

0

Hey everyone,

I'm trying to write for the December LSAT while working full-time. I currently am working in "big-law" and the hours are crazy at times. I'm seeking advice on how to juggle job, girlfriend, and life basically... I know essentially its up to me on how to handle all this but I would greatly appreciate to hear from people who happen to be dealing with a busy schedule and are trying to shot for the 165-170 range.

Best of luck!

0

I understand that it is very important to determine if the stimulus is an argument (premise + conclusion) or simply information. I am having difficulty at this because some of the conclusions are hidden. Can someone please help me to better understand how to determine if an argument is contained within the stimulus? Thank you!

0

Hi all,

I am looking for a Skype partner(s) to BR Preptests with for the December test. Ideally, I want to have a call at least twice a week, once on either Tues or Wed night and once on Saturday night. I should add that I am looking for serious and disciplined partner(s) who are committed to calling every week. I would like to start with PT 36 next week.

Please message me if you are interested!

0

Hi there!

Looking for any and all suggestions on how to improve on political/ economics based questions in the Logical Reasoning section (for example, those that talk about government structure, public opinion of policy, legislation, etc). Admittedly (and with some shame), I do not follow politics very closely. I find when I am reading the stimulus that I am getting hung up on the language and spend too much time trying to decipher what it is saying (I don't seem to have this issue with many other questions), and in the end I find political questions to be a huge time sink for me as I try and decipher what they are saying, and then, subsequently, mull over the answer options.

I am planning to take the October LSAT and am currently PT'ing in my ideal minimum range. Currently, I consider most of these questions to be a write-off, however, I would like to get to the point where I am more comfortable with them (I typically score 85-88% in the LR section, though I get few politics-based questions correct).

What would you do given the time limitation? Drill political questions? Read certain articles/resources? Any and all help is appreciated! I don't plan on deferring my test date since I am already scoring in my target range, I am just hoping to boost my score if possible, or add a little padding room to account for nerves on test day (or the possibility that the test in Oct contains a larger number of these types of questions).

0

Hi everyone, I am pretty much ALWAYS getting either the 2nd or 3rd question wrong in logic games. I know why, because by the 2nd/3rd I haven't completely mastered the rules but by the last few I understand them 100%. Any advice on how to master the moment I diagram them?

0

Alright, so I love 7sage and I truly think it has helped me in areas where my previous study program did not. I have been preptesting up to PT 45. However, I am approaching a set of tests that I already covered before. I have done PT 52-64, and I am pretty worried about inflated scores. Any advice on how to PT from this point on? I plan to test in October.

Also, I want to ramp up my actual score. I keep scoring in the 150's but I have BR'ed at 168. I know it can be a stretch but my goal is to score in the 170's. Does anyone have any advice on how to improve their actual score? I have been having a lot of confidence fails during the test because I completely miss problems (I don't even circle them). I am afraid that I cannot even identify the feeling that something is wrong.

Last thing: where do you guys recommend getting the LSAT trainer?

0

Hey!

Was wondering how everyone has been applying the fool-proof guide? Do you do it to all the games that you do if you had time? Or just the ones that JY talked about in his videos and in the problem set?

Let me know some of the methods that have worked for you?

Thank you :)

0

This might seem a bit silly, but in after doing the translations into lawgic exercise...do we always diagram logic whenever we see it in any LSAT question? For instance pt 27 st 1 q 17, I started reading the stem and noticed the logic and diagram quickly but then I didn't really need it. Is that a special case? Does anyone have a recommendation? Thanks!

0

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-18-section-2-question-22/

Hi there, I found the correct answer choice makes sense. But I chose A when I first do this question. I think A also explain the conflict by point out the possibility that: maybe because generally people don't know the fact that the mistaken scientific finding is mistaken; therefore, nowadays scientists study them and make more people know about the the inaccuracy of the earlier flawed research." (I know it sounds weird when you read this, but it comes out naturally to me when I encounter this question at first time). Answer D seems also problematic to me. Would it be valuable for nowadays scientists to study earlier but mistaken research just because they want to be more familiar to the older research. Maybe they are interested in scientific history, because the word "valuable" is really vague here, different people may have different standard of "valuable".

I notice that I made some assumption unconsciously, but I do not know what are those assumptions. I would really appreciate your help.

0

I thought this one was worth discussing. I feel as if the diction really invites you to botch the set up. I know for the politician's statement I diagrammed that as SK --> /D (Save Koala, stop deforestation). My initial logic when I see a word like needed or required is to place it in the necessary position -- in fact I did this almost mechanically -- but upon review it occurred to me that "all that is needed" is basically like saying "the only thing you need" which upon further extrapolation becomes "The Only" which introduces sufficient. In any case I still think the answer choices were a bit confusing and I definitely believe the 7sage community would be well-served by taking a look at this must be true question type.

0

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-23-section-3-question-06/

i had quite a difficult time w/ question 3. During my timed approach I did not find an answer during the blond review I found the answer but only b/c it *seemed* the most plausible.

Excerpt from passage: ...important trading route linking China and Europe and it's a popular stopover for pilgrims on route between Morroco and Mecca.

Answer C: the purse "HAD" been brought to the ancient city by a pilgrim on route between Morocco and Meca

From the excerpt I'm concluding that the purse could potentially been brought by someone from China, Europe, Morocco, or Mecca. From the excerpt are we to assume that people accessing the trading port from China or Europe (don't stop over)?

What threw me off is the word (HAD) in the answer choice. Which is why I was reluctant to choose C as the answer. However, if the assumption is that those accessing the trading port don't stop over then it becomes a little more clear.

0

Hi, guys, I am confused with the relationship between "causation" and conditional logic. Could anyone give me some help? According to the lessons, it seems that "A causes B" = A-->B. However, in PT25-S4-Q12, this rule does not seem to work. In the stimulus, "the school principle insisted that student failures are caused by bad teaching." Then, he concludes that since failing grades disappeared, the teaching had improved at the school. This is a parallel flaw question. I am wondering what is the flaw. Isn't it that bad teaching --> failure, here, /failure, therefore,/bad teaching? I also find several similar questions in the PTs. Therefore, I really need your help. Thank you so much.

1

So I've been drilling logic games with the Cambridge packets and have done pretty well with the games I've drilled. Timing and accuracy were both very good. Then, a few days ago, I transitioned to timed logic games sections and I've been depressed ever since. I've been going -5,-7 on all of my timed sections and these were on sections that 7sage rated "easiest."

I've realized that the Cambridge packets actually hurt my LG ability and I'll explain why: As Pacifico mentioned in his LG guide, they key skill to scoring high on the LG section is determining the correct setup. With the Cambridge packets I already knew what type of game I was drilling and so I would just draw out my board without really reading much of the rules. I was simply a machine. Now when I take LG sections it is often difficult for me to figure out the correct setup and it's killing my confidence and score. With two months out from the October test I fear that I won't be able to conquer the logic games section before the exam. This, coupled with the fact that October is really my last hope if I want to realistically apply for the 2016 cycle, has been causing me a lot of anxiety. I'm writing this post so that I hope someone learns from my mistake. Drill full logic games sections instead of working on specific game types. I believe it's the most effective strategy.

Today I took a PT and logic games was my first section. Absolutely bombed it and couldn't recover the rest of the exam. The entire test all I was thinking about was the terrible LG section but I made sure to just push through and finish the rest of the exam since this may happen on test day and I have to learn to adapt. Haven't blind reviewed yet but I'm guessing I practiced 10 points lower than my average. It's been a really disappointing week and if anyone can provide me with some advice/encouragement I'd appreciate it greatly.

Good luck studying everyone!

2

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-28-section-1-question-09/

For this question I chose AC (C) but I circled this question because AC (E) got my attention. During BR I did not change my answer because (C) was still the flaw in the argument. So could someone explain how AC (E) is wrong? I'm not sure if it's because it's speaking about how most people disagree with the commentators, therefore, it makes it false...so since they believe it to be false it has to be false? That why it's incorrect?

0

Hi all,

I just wanted to see if I could get some advice about my situation because I'm starting to get really nervous about whether or not I can take the October test. Unfortunately if I don't, I'm not sure when the next feasible time will be for me to take it. I'm a rising junior, but because the December one is right around my finals when I'm sure I'll be way too stressed about schoolwork to do much LSAT studying (plus I'm on the quarter system which means during the quarter I would have little time too) and because next summer I'm going to be taking classes and writing my thesis I wanted to try and get it done this summer.

My diagnostic around early June was a 162. After that I studied using 7sage for about 6 weeks before starting to take prep tests and landed at around 169. I've been taking on average 3 tests per week and have now taken 6 tests. Unfortunately it looks like I'm sort of already plateauing at around 169-170 and my goal is to get a 175 on test day. I did have one kind of outlier, the test before last I actually scored a 178 (PT41) which got me really excited after a string of like three 169's in a row, but then today I scored only a 170 again. I was hoping I would at least have improved to like 171-172 but no dice. So it seems like thats where I've leveled off score-wise.

As far as per-section, it kind of varies wildly which concerns me. I think as far as consistency goes, LR is my best. In the last 6 tests I went -5, -3, -5, -2, -2, -6. So i had a string of a couple pretty good scores where I only missed 2-3 total in LR but then, again today to my dismay, I did super bad and missed 6 of them.

LG is definitely hugely hit or miss with me. Some tests I've missed as most as 9 or 10 (cases where I couldn't even finish all the games and got stuck, plus got some wrong), whereas today I was able to make up for my shitty LR score by missing none of them (but the games were ridiculously easy.) At the same time, in the PT where I magically scored 178, the games weren't completely trivial and yet I was able to finish them and get them all right. So lots of variability for reasons that elude me.

RC is pretty stable too, but still not where I want it to be. Last 6 tests went -4, -2, -3, -4, -1, and -5 (today). Not a horrible average but definitely not where I need it to be for test day.

I'm pretty worried about my consistency. I had a pretty bad day today (in that I improved almost none, and in fact did worse on the LRs which I'm usually much better at) and I'm super worried that I'm not going to be able to get this down in time for October while still being able to do enough PTs. I had originally scheduled myself to do another 3 or 4 PTs this week but decided I would only do 2 (at the end of the week) after taking 2 or 3 days off to really study the questions i'm missing most often hard (in LRs this is Flaws) and seeing if I can improve that way.

Overall I'm pretty lost. I'm having a really hard time making the marginal gains I need to get myself consistently above 170 and into the 175 region (except for the wonderful 178 test where everything magically went right) and my variability in scores for the individual sections (particularly LR on bad days, and LG seemingly randomly) scares the crap out of me. I'm not sure at this point what my studying should be like, how many PTs and how often I should be doing them, or what. I'd really appreciate any advice since this as I'm really not even sure if it's worth it to keep going for October at this point which is a humongous disappointment for me. Let me know if there's anymore details I can provide that would be helpful. Thanks guys!

0

does anyone have any guidance for determining when to draw out scenarios vs brute force the answer choices? sometimes it's pretty clear that a new local rule in a question creates two scenarios and in those cases it's obvious that you should solve for each board before attacking the questions.

however there are also cases where it's less clear whether it's more efficient to break board into scenarios or find the correct answer by brute forcing answer choices. Here's an example: http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-49-section-1-game-1/

On question 3, JY goes directly to the answer choices after deducing that there must be two IN blocks. He could instead have attempted to place those blocks and would have realized there are only two placements _ IN IN_ or _ IN _ IN . Then, after deducing those two scenarios, he could have gone to the AC's. I find that JY has a tendency to go to the AC's in these cases.

0

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-20-section-1-question-02/

Ok, I am pretty pissed I missed this because I felt like I got it right when I did it. I didn't even mark it for BR. As a CPA, the equivocation of a few words in the stimulus and answer choices makes this question pretty terrible IMO. Are we supposed to assume that "administered to people" in answer choice A is the same idea as "administering a vaccine"? Administering to people to me means giving people the shot at the doctors office while administering a vaccine to me means the administration costs (SG&A costs) within the firm; these are two totally unique concepts. This is worse than usual writing for the LSAT.

This is a weaken question. It is from a pretty old test, and I feel like the wording on this one reflects that.

A director at a pharm company argues that the developmental costs (production costs) for new vaccines that the health department has requested should be subsidized since the marketing costs (selling costs) promises to be less profitable (this last part makes no sense to me, and I think it shows how sloppy the LSAT writers can be sometimes when they write about business, but whatever). The director argued that the sales are going to be lower since people only take the drug once (OK, this sentence makes more sense relative to the last one).

What I am looking for: Maybe the fact that they only take the drug once is not relevant. This step was pretty difficult to do for this one.

Answer A: This is the correct answer, but I still take issue with the wording. How do we equivocate administration of the vaccines with sales (or anything that relates to the director's argument)? I just don't see how this affects the argument. If the drugs are administered to more people (i.e. doctors give the shots to more people), why does the business care directly? The pharm company only cares about selling the vaccines to hospitals and doctors, what they do with the drugs after the fact is irrelevant to the business (purchasing the drugs is a sunk cost to the hospital). What if the doctor gives away the vaccine for free? The pharm has already made its money on sale (and based off the argument from the director, less than what it would get from other drugs) regardless of who actually gets the shots. I think there are huge problems with this answer choice, and I think more modern LSATS would use tighter wording.

Answer B: This is irrelevant to the argument. So what if "many" vaccines are designed to prevent things.

Answer C: So what.

Answer D: I don't care about other pharm companies. We are talking about Rexx.

Answer E: This is what I chose. I chose this because I interpreted the costs of administrating a vaccine as part of administrative costs within the firm. If the pharm companies don't bear this cost, then this attacks the support that they should be subsidized. Apparently, we are supposed to assume that the "cost of administering a vaccine" is what I interpreted A's predicate to mean. However, this answer would run into the same problem that I think makes A incorrect also.

To hell with this question.

0

Confirm action

Are you sure?