Why C is the the right choice?

Context: Some researchers claim that people tend to gesture less when they articulate what would typically be regarded as abstract rather than physical concepts.

Premise: Because some people perceived words like xxx, as XXX....

Conclusion: To point out that such a correlation is far from universal is insufficient reason to reject the researcher's claim.

where is the reconciliation?

Hi,

I understand why B here is right, but I have trouble understanding why D is completely wrong. After all, couldn't "some" footprints include the footprints that Dr. Tyson is looking at, and couldn't missing a feature of the original footprint lead to a huge change in how the footprint is interpreted?

Any #help would be appreciated!

Thanks!

Hi All. I have two questions:

(1) Roughly when did the important distinguishing features of newer logical reasoning questions become the norm? I'm thinking in particular about longer and tougher stems, more frequent strengthen/weaken/RRE questions, less frequent formal logic questions, and generally trickier answer choices?

(2) In these newer LR sections, are the toughest questions typically found between questions #11 and 20? Or are 21-26 generally harder? Or has it gotten more random?

I've been largely following the "save the best for last" approach in my studying thus far, and so have only recently moved from tests #20-45 or so to more recent tests. Recently, I've begun alternating between tests near #80 and closer to the 50s, and plan to keep doing so. Today, though, I took my first test in the 50s (#55) after taking a couple near #80, and the LR sections felt much closer to the old style I'd been used to than the new style I'd seen in #78 and #80---in particular I noticed more formal logic, and that the hardest questions were located near the end rather than the late-middle. So I'm wondering what to expect. Roughly when did the shift that happened between early and late tests occur, and how accurate is my sense (partially based on some article I now can't find) that the newer sections have harder questions towards the late-middle?

Hi, I'm new to studying so I'm having trouble with making an inference. The stimulus states that "none of the responses among terminal cancer patients to various therapeutic measures has been more positive than the response among those who consumed shark cartilage". The powerscore bible states that we can infer "(consuming) shark cartilage has received a more positive response than any other therapy". First, how would we diagram this or is it even diagrammable? Second, what fundamental is this testing? Is it logical opposites? Thanks in advance and happy new year!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-28-section-1-question-11/

I originally put A, I now understand why A is wrong. But I don't really understand why D is the right answer choice and what it means by "supposed class allegiance"

Sorry if there is another post on here that talks about this.

I just finished the CC, I'm sitting for July (less than 4 weeks away) and am wondering what PT to start with since I have limited time to PT.

I have done a decent job foolproofing, spent a ton of time on LR, and ended with RC so that is fresh on my mind and was doing surprisingly well.

I have a one week vacation from work I plan to take which I'll get about 60 (5 PTs) hours of total study time that week for PT'ing, but weeks with work I'm limited to max out at 25 hours (2 PTs) per week. Giving me a grand total of about 110 hours (not including the rest of this week).

PT's take about 12 hours in total, that's just shy of 10 PTs. Do I start with the most recent 10 then?

Ty in advance.

I got this one right in BR, but would like an explanation as to why it is the best answer.

Admin note: edited title; please use the format of "PT#.S#.Q# - [first set of words]"

Hi, can anyone elaborate on the math that J.Y. does in this problem in the explanation video? I’m still confused on how he got 200 for one aspect of it.

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

Just kills me on the inside when I can rock the tough ones and I miss the super easy ones according to 7Sage :)

Does anyone know how to access the giant web outline with all the components that the guy uses through the LR sections it looks like a massive web I would really like access to it to see all the essentials components outlined on a visual field.

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?

Listen and subscribe:

Apple Podcasts | Spotify

Join Rahela and Eric for a Thanksgiving-themed conversation about the five LSAT strategies that made the biggest difference in their prep. They break down how to navigate bad study days, develop patience and resilience, get real value from wrong answer journals, rely on study buddies, and change your approach when you hit a plateau.

If you are looking to reboot your studying or understand what actually moves the needle, this episode is for you.

Anyone near the Charleston area willing to study together? I find I focus more when I'm with someone else studying together and none of my friends can help me.

I do very well on LR questions but always trip up in one of the following situations:

I feel like soon as I can cement this I will be good! I'm challenged to properly identify whether one can pronounce 'X' or 'Y' of a given statement as a certain condition BECAUSE the logical indicator preceded it or not. Are there circumstances with rules for when it does not? I keep getting caught in the confusion between how to label what is before and after the logical indicator. And yes, I have gone through the lessons on this.

J.Y. can you assist with this #help

Hello,

I did not choose A (the correct answer) in this question because I thought "specific examples" was incorrect given the fact that the passage did not raise any plural nouns and actually seemed quite general to describe their examples. Can someone explain why the examples raised in the passage count as "specific examples"?

Thanks!

#help

Admin note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-25-section-1-passage-1-questions/

Hi everyone! I scored a 158 on the July LSAT with about a month of prep. I'm taking the September LSAT and am seeking a tutor to help bring me into the 160s, willing to pay, let me know if you can help :)

^^ title

.

So I got sucked into the words when I was doing this. This is a clear necessary/sufficient question.

The logic structure, however, was fairly simple. IF retail store has Revenue decrease (RD), that means EITHER Attitde changed or P risen. IF P risen, salaries not Kept Pace. RD--> A or P, and then P --> /SKP.

Question stem shows that salaries kept pace, so SKP contrapositive of P --> /SKP is SKP-->/P. In English: SKP means that Price not risen. Then we go into the answer choice. When I was doing it, I saw D and thought hey if the other condition happened, that means the Revenues does not decrease, Chose D, but no. Both P and and A are necessary condition for RD. Satisfying RD leads to either A or P, but satisfying A or P means nothing to RD, and /P does not lead to A as the sufficient condition RD has not been met. The decrease revenues can still happen, or it would not. Basic lawgic lesson here. AC A is a popular choice, but /P in the condition chain of RD--> A or P doesn't do anything; so /P does not lead to A being satisfied.

Takeaway: be very sensitive to conditional words like IF, and remember the foundational lawgic. IF introduces sufficient condition, and satisfying necessary condition is not enough.

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

Danino has expressed dissatisfaction that many genetic studies have attributed the ‘spread of agriculture’ into the subcontinent to migrations. Just to be sure that no one thinks that the practice of agriculture is in the genes, I would like to point out that the spread of the technology of agriculture was associated with the movement of people; agriculturists who took the technology to new regions and taught it to the locals in the new region. Movement of people implies movement of genes. Some migrants ‘export’ their genes to a new region by taking spouses from the new region and producing children with them who stay in the new region. We can never be sure that the attribution of agriculture having been introduced to the Indian subcontinent by migrants is fully true. However, genetic data do support this model, especially of the spread of modern, organized agriculture.

Having said this, I must also emphasize, once again, that collection of more extensive data is always more helpful in understanding our past and of the spread of our inventions and innovations. A Y-chromosomal signature, haplogroup J, was shown to be associated with the spread of modern agriculture. This signature has its highest frequency in the Fertile Crescent region – the region comprising the present-day countries of Syria, Lebanon, Turkey – where the technology of modern agriculture was invented about 7,000–10,000 years ago. Collection of deeper data showed that this signature is quite heterogeneous and is composed of at least four sub-signatures, one of which – haplogroup J2b2 – is confined to the India–Pakistan region.

This sub-signature arose over 13,000 years ago and hence its introduction into India could not have been by migrants who introduced modern agriculture into India. We showed that the haplogroup J2b2 possibly arose in India, because the highest frequency of this haplogroup is found in India. We discovered multiple epicentres of this haplogroup in India and interestingly these epicentres neatly coincided with the seats of introduction of early forms of agriculture in India (as evidenced by the study of fossilized pollen grains by Fuller and his team). It is unlikely that haplogroup J arose independently multiple times in geographically separated places. It probably arose in an ancient population who had spread themselves in geographically separated regions and they invented rudimentary forms of agriculture independently in multiple geographical regions. However, it is notable that these early forms of agriculture remained largely confined to India and Pakistan region.

Question:

Danino believed that genetic studies, which “attributed the ‘spread of agriculture’ into the Indian subcontinent to migrations,” are:

1)incorrect because migrants did not introduce agriculture into the subcontinent.

true because it was indeed migrants who introduced agriculture into the subcontinent.

only partially correct as early forms of agriculture were indigenously developed in the subcontinent.

originally results of expert intuition but later validated by an improved ability to decipher evidence.

Source : https://www.imsindia.com

Need help in finding POV!

Correct Answer is 3 .

But I find AC 1 more suitable because 1st line of passage "Danino expressed dissatisfaction....."

I have been studying on and off for 3 months, I am not sure how to go about studying more seriously. This week I have been working on Necessary Assumption questions (not doing too hot on them) but should I get a good grasp on NA questions and then go into studying for another question type and continue that cycle on one question type at a time? If you have any words of wised regarding this, I will be eternally grateful.

There is no explanation for this question on 7sage, so I'll just post a discussion that includes my reasoning on how I got this wrong in timed conditions and later right in BR. If anyone finds it useful, great!

P: The evidence for this explosion is that 45 of the 70 active opera companies were founded in the last 30 years.

C: There has been an explosion of public interest in opera over the last three decades.

<><><><><>><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

The author makes this assumption.

The fact that 45 opera companies were founded = an explosion of public interest in opera.

Now, the conclusion seems a lot weaker right? If you could give an alternate explanation to why these new opera companies were founded that contradicts the idea that there has been an explosion of public interest in opera, then that weakens the conclusion, which in a NA question means it is right.

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

AC B.- If denied, this weakens the argument which is correct. What if the 45 opera companies that opened did so because some other opera companies shut down? Then that shows that there has not been necessarily an explosion of public interest, but rather a replacement of opera companies in the same market.

AC D.- The premise and conclusion still stand as they have nothing to do with average audience.

AC E.- This does not have to be true for the argument to stand on its own. It could still be the case that not all 45 of the opera companies that opened. The explosion of public interest could have still happened as at least some of these opera companies opened because of an explosion in public interest for opera.

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.

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.