Hey guys, I just started studying for the LG portion of the exam. I was wondering if you had any tips for learning what to look for in the answer choices. For example if the question stem asks, "All of the following could be true except . . . " JY, without skipping a beat, says okay we are looking for 1 Must be false and the 4 others could be true. Not the best example, but its the best I could come up with right now haha. Thank you in advance!

For each drill question, it shows a "curve" for the likelyhood of someone with that score getting the question right. But im feeling a bit confused on what that exactly means. So if the black bar is at "135" for example, it means that someone with a 135 was likely to get that question right?

Hello! I wanted to ask how do you guys do drilling, and how many questions should I do for drilling? It would mean a lot thank you!

This was not a fun flaw question.

At its absolute most basic, the stimulus says:

Conclusion: Not X.

Premise: If we BELIEVED X -> Y.

The assumption here is subtle: Since not Y, not X.

But why on Earth would we make that jump based on the single premise we are given? Also, notice we are drawing a conclusion based on what would be true if we BELIEVED otherwise, not if the case it WERE otherwise.

Answers:

A. A true belief (X) can have bad consequences (maybe, not Y). In other words, the author is failing to consider the possibility that X -> not Y. If this is true, the argument doesn´t work.

B. The author establishes one claim to not be true, but where is the other???

C. Irrelevant, there are no motives mentioned.

D. No implication that the most negative outcome must occur.

E. There is no group of individuals being compared to another.

https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/advanced-valid-forms-review/

We have B-most->Z which implies two inferences B-most->C and B-most->/O. When you combine B-most->Z with B-most->/P, that gives you the inference /P some Z. But can you also then take the two previous inferences, B-most->C and B-most->/O, in combination with B-most->/P to create to additional inferences, /P some C and /P some /O, respectively? If those last two inferences are not valid inferences, then why are they not? I ask because in the comments on the lesson, someone stated that you can infer /P some Z but NOT /P some C and /P some /O, which makes zero sense to me.

So I took the today's exam and I am currently feeling I bombed it so bad. I had one with the 3 LR's and I really screwed in RC. I guessed about 5 questions just in RC and probably missed another 6-7 questions top of that guessed ones.

My situation is little unique. It's my 4th time taking LSAT and previously I had 151,cancelled, and 162. If I cancel today's exam, I will not retake and apply in the coming cycle with my current numbers but I am wondering if that cancellation or lowest score from today's exam (such as like 155-157) will hurt my admission chance.

Some people suggested me that since the schools are only looking for the highest score anyway, it will not really hurting anything but I am so worrying right now.

Hi, guys. Recently purchased the Ultimate+ and really am loving the wide range of problem sets available for improving. My question is this: if through my first run (in this case a MSS problem set) of a problem set I finish each question in good time with confidence, clarity, and correctness; is it worth my extra time to go back through this problem set immediately after with the videos and blind review, even if I felt 100% certain throughout? I'm making my way through the CC now.

Also want to say I love the camaraderie on 7sage. I'm very happy to be here. Writing in November for my first time!

wanting to get into the 160s what can be done to reach that score

This is not really helping me to diagnose weaknesses: I got 7/7 in one 4-star Law RC and missed 2 on a much easier Law RC on the same Pt.

AND: the harder one was the final section of the RC and the final section of the test so in theory I should have been more tired. So I can rule that out as a possible explanation.

Not really a question; it's just kind of mystifying!

For this question answer choice C is correct which makes sense to me. I picked D because I thought the analogy between car technology and computer technology worked well. My question is: are answer choices with analogies usually wrong on strengthening questions? OR does it just depend on the question?

Hi,

Is anyone currently in NY preparing for the June LSAT? I wanted to see if y'all wanted to started a group chat for any last minute preparations. This will also help for anyone who has questions during the cycle this year we can all give support to one another.

This question is a little complicated to parse because their are two agents in the discussion, the nation who may attack (Potential Aggressor [PA]) and the nation who may be attacked (Target). Clarifying who is who helps set up the lawgic from the stimulus.

In the stimulus you get:

PAs having Fear of Retaliation implies that PAs will hesitate to attack (PAFR -> PAHesitate)

PAFR also implies that PAs are deterred (PAFR -> DetersPAs)

You also get this, which is very unweildy:

if PA thinks Target has great retaliatory power then PA thinks it CANNOT defend itself

(PAThinkTargetHasRetaliatoryPwr -> /PAThinkCanDefend)

an inference we can make right away is:

if /PAThinkCanDefend -> PAFR

if PAs think they CANNOT defend against retaliation then PAs have a fear of retaliation

Now we apply valid argument form 3 - Transitive:

PAThinksTargetHasGreatRetaliatoryPwr -> /PAThinkCanDefend -> PAFR -> DetersPAs & PAHesitate

Is there an answer choice that leverages the first step in order to optimize the final step? D does.

D: if you want deterrence, tell everyone about your great retaliatory power (because of the lawgic from the stimulus).

A: says "DeterPAs -> /PAThinkCanDefend" which confuses the given sufficient and necessary elements

B: says "PAThinksPA(self)HasGreatRetaliatoryPwr -> DetersPAs" and the stimulus doesn't say anything about that first part

C: assumes nations always attack unless deterred, which common sense indicates is probably false (hopefully) But aside from real world knowledge, it says "if PAHesitate -> /PAThinkCanDefend" (if PA hesitates then PA thinks it can't defend against retaliation). What we can say is that SOME PAs that hesitate were deterred. This answer choice is the same as A in its error.

E: We don’t know that retaliatory force has to be GREATER, only that it has to be “so great that a potential aggressor nation would have reason to think that it could not defend itself against such retaliation.” Also, superlatives like "maximum" give me pause and seem to appear in false answer choices often.

Does anyone have any advice for notetaking/annotation for online LSAT? It seems so much more time consuming to use online functions than to simply underline on a paper test. Just looking for some helpful information before my test.

In lesson 2 of Assumption and Weakening questions, J.Y. stated, "Bear in mind that most arguments in real life and on the LSAT do not have a valid relationship." A deeper explanation at this early stage will be very helpful to me. I am particularly interested in the "real-life" side of this argument, but also what this means for the LSAT as I work through this section.

Can someone provide a deeper explanation of this statement?

Admin note: https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/good-v-bad-arguments/?ss_completed_lesson=1003

To help with my studies, I am reading books to practice some of the things taught in the V.2 curriculum. I am reading a book called Political Tribes by Amy Chua. On page 91 it states the following " Experts today agree that merely deploying twenty thousand additional troops would not have been sufficient had American commanders not "stopped fighting Iraq's tribal structure and instead started to cooperate with it..."

I think this sentence is similar to PT 64.1.18.

The way I would translate to a conditional would be

If not "stopped fighting Iraq's tribal structure and instead started to cooperate with it.." then, deploying 20k would have not been sufficient

or

If it was sufficient then they stopped fighting or started to cooperate with it

Any insight on this would be great!

Hi all, I started doing timed past tests but can't finish LG sections (LR and RC are fine). Should I come back and finish the leftover LG questions untimed but continue doing the rest timed? How should I go about doing timed prep tests now?

I came across a rule I'm not used to diagramming in PT 85 Game 1, and was curious if any of you have come up with a clever shorthand. I ended up coming up with one on the spot, but I think it led me to make an otherwise avoidable mistake on what should have been a straightforward game.

There are at least two slots separating H and S, but H and S are interchangeable in order. (JY used H _ _ S with a small "LL2") symbol in a switching box, but he himself called it somewhat clumsy.) When I did this game the first time around, I ended up forgetting that 2 slots was a minimum and not exact. Perhaps there's a way to make this rule clearer in the diagram and less of an afterthought?

Another more general diagramming question, not from PT 85: Values are not consecutive. I've always represented consecutive as (AB) and nonconsecutive as (AB) but find this leaves something to be desired in terms of clarity. Any and all suggestions are much appreciated!

So I'm on the MSS lessons, and I didn't really do the drilling questions timed, i just did them and then went back and BR-ed them. Should I start doing the drills timed or is it better to take my time with them and save the "timed" part for the PTs?

So, JY says that we need to use timed BR when doing a section of LR, but what if i'm still going thru the CC and haven't gotten to the point of PTs yet? do i still time myself while doing the cluster of such as weakening questions? #help

Hi all! I am reviewing PT86.S1.Q21. I understand why we can get rid of answer choices a,c and e as well as the general flaw in the argument being that the spread of organic farming is only a problem for having enough food if all farmers switch to organic farming. However, I am having trouble with what differentiates answers b and d. I know it has something to do with the logical meaning of some and all, and their opposites not some and not all. The explanation video for this question leaves it up to us to think about at the end, but I'm hitting a wall so all help appreciated! Thanks!

I am just in my week 2 of the cc and its super frustrating to basically BR every single example video only to get it wrong. So instead of focusing on the negative, I am trying to stay positive and understand that I am just starting out and there is more room for improvement. Does anyone have any uplifting stories that basically parallel being bad at the cc in the beginning but crushing it on the test date?

I am trying to understand how to tackle reading comprehension blind review and practice drills for radical improvement. I do understand how the memory method is supposed to work as a process but I need to prioritize or do something. I find myself alternating with speed reading and not fully connecting referential phrasing dots to meet the 3 (mostly ends up being 4 1/2 minted still) then getting a poor understanding of the passage overall. Or reading for clarity as J.Y. does in explanation videos, trying to mimic real-time imagination strategies , then killing more time. Both resulting in about 10 to 13 minutes per passage. Which one do I prioritize? Should I focus on better reading then time will automatically fall in line with confidence? Or am I missing the point altogether? #help Pleaseee. Thank you in advance.

Listen and subscribe:

Apple Podcasts | Spotify

In this episode of the 7Sage LSAT Podcast, we tackle exactly how to turn a disappointing score into a breakthrough—so you’ll walk into test day more confident and prepared than ever. We break down how to diagnose the gaps in your first run (from timing hiccups to recurring question‑type errors), then show you how to rebuild your study plan around those insights. You’ll pick up practical tips on setting realistic weekly goals, practicing mindfulness for test day, and slotting in targeted drills to shore up weak spots.

Check out JY’s explanation breaking down the passage for PT 42, Section 3, Passage 4. He shows how crucial it is to be able to visualize. It is a great passage to hit hard for review!

Hey everyone,

I just finished my LSAT writing section. However, I realized that when it prompted me to take a picture of my id, i held it away from the camera and next to my face on accident. I believe it will be super blurry, so is this something I need to worry about? Am I overreacting?