For Comparative RC how do you attack questions like this. The answers are usually a key term and very short. Is there any proven method or do you just start searching both passages and eliminate until you find your answer?

I'm taking the Feb test, the closer the date is the less focused I am when taking practice tests. Anyone out there feeling the same way? I try so hard to sit down and focus but for some reason I can't take a full test without getting bored or feeling out of focus. Any tips?

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-59-section-3-question-19/

Can anyone explain this question and how the correct answer logically follows?

Hey guys,

I am planning for the June test and just started the Ultimate course. I moved back home to dedicate full time to the LSAT and have almost no obligations for the next 5 months. Back when I studied in late 2015 for October/December, I took an expensive prep course where I crammed in 8-10 hours a day (bad idea) hoping to do well in 2 months. Now that I started 7sage and embraced the method of taking your time, I realize I have too much time!

Other than following a strict schedule, which gives me about a month of the fundamentals, what else should I utilize? I would love to do problem sets here and there from PT 1-35 but I know the questions are also used by JY in the beginning of the course. Obviously, 36-76 will be for PT and BR only.

I guess my feeling is that I won't be motivated enough to stick to 2 hours a day when I am used to much more. I already plan on reviewing lessons such as Grammar (concepts never taught in my last prep) but I would prefer to hit about 30-40 hours a week to maximize my potential.

What do you guys think? Thanks in advance!

I'm confused when, where and how the word "not" is used sometimes. For example, in this question answer choice E's conclusion is translated to if a university class is not conducted in a normal classroom, then it will be conducted in a laboratory. /UC ---> L

I thought "not" is group four and negates the necessary condition? Is it because the if already designates the sufficient condition and therefore the not stays on the sufficient as opposed to moving to the necessary side?

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-63-section-1-question-21/

Target times in games will vary based off of one's respective LSAT goal score. Are the games target times listed by 7sage guided towards someone seeking a particular score? Depending on if someone is seeking to hit a 165-170, 170-175, or 175+ score, how should one relate to the target times listed?

There are only two test centers that are currently available for June 2016 lsat in my area, whereas for February, I clearly remember seeing more than five. Since the deadline for changing test date is tomorrow, I guess I have no choice but to select between the two, but one test center is notorious for being bad and the other is 40 miles away. Does anyone know if LSAC offers more test centers as we get closer to the actual test date?

admin edit: here's the link to the lesson: http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-76-section-2-question-16/

Hi everyone,

I understand why (C) is correct for this question, yet I picked (E) during my timed PT and I'm still not 100% sure why it's wrong. From the stim, I understood that a group of respondents was split as follows: 40% wanted conservatives, 40% wanted liberals, and 20% wanted moderates. From that info, we don't know precisely what PERCENTAGE of conservatives/liberals/moderates these respondents each want in the legislature: only that they want them. Maybe one respondent that wanted liberals wanted a legislature with 60% liberals, while another wanted it with 100% liberals. Therefore, this evidence only supports a rough estimate.

The conclusion, however, states that each citizen wants a 40/40/20 split in the legislature, which are EXACT PERCENTAGES. Therefore, I thought that (E) applied (going from a rough estimate to an exact/quantified conclusion.)

Thoughts on this are much appreciated!! :)

I've gotten to a point where the only types of questions I'm missing are weaken, principle or flaw questions. I usually am on the right path to the correct answer but seem to be stuck between two answers almost overtime- and chose the incorrect answer very frequently. Any tips or pointers in what to consider when answering these types of questions?

Something I came across recently and found slightly confusing was the difference between a claim and an assumption. Can someone help me understand the difference between these two categorizations specifically as it relates to logical reasoning?

I had this down to B or D during the timed exam, and I can't figure out what is technically wrong with B. In my mind, it's as close to a sufficient assumption as D is.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-73-section-2-question-06/

This is a pseudo-sufficient assumption question.

The characters are too stylized for them to be real people. The film is funny, which is important for comedy. The film is popular. Therefore, the criticism of the film for not being realistic is wrong.

What I am looking for: If a comedy is funny, then it's wrong to criticize it for it being not realistic.

Answer A: This severely hurts the argument, which a PSA shouldn't do.

Answer B: I don't see what's wrong with this. This doesn't bring in the comedy part, but I don't see how this isn't a PSA if D is also. We know the film is popular, so if we assume that "if a film is popular, then it is successful," isn't that equally as good answer choice D? Success isn't the word I'd use, but that's why this is a PSA question and not a true SA question. Answer D (the correct answer) also uses the word success.

I get that the "popularity" part is most likely context, but why can't a sufficient assumption make the context relevant to the argument itself? For example, say that

1.) All Jedi use the Force.

Therefore, David uses the Force.

The obvious missing sufficient assumption is "David is a Jedi." But, couldn't I also say that "Everyone named David uses the Force?" To me, that's equally as good a sufficient assumption since it provides an assumption that allows our conclusion to follow validly.

Answer C: We have no idea what films should/shouldn't do.

Answer D: This is close to what I anticipated, so I picked this and kept it during BR. However, what technically makes this better than B? If a film succeeds within a genre (comedy), then the film is successful. Isn't this structurally the same thing as B? The necessary conditions for both B and D are "films are successful" and both sufficient conditions bring in known facts about the film.

Answer E: Same as answer C. We don't know what films should/shouldn't do.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-62-section-2-question-11/

When writing out the conditional logic for the reporter, I initially got /C--> /M but when I went back to review I got C---> M. In other words, because of the if I kept cured as the sufficient and then placed medication M as the necessary. But I thought when you have the word not in the sufficient side and the not in the necessary side you can negate the necessary side twice. I guess what I'm confused on is when you have "not" written on the sufficient and necessary conditional. If not is on both sides of the conditional how do you use lawgic?

I've been averaging in the mid-150s on the prep tests and I don't know what to do. I have been studying fiendishly for the last two months and my scores haven't improved. I really, really need a higher score and with test day only a month away I'm having a hard time keeping my spirits up and my head in the game. Does anyone have advice for how I could maybe approach this in a new, more useful way? Thanks, guys.

I think the error that author makes is false equation (population # = # of library users) but can someone explain answers (B) and (E) in further detail? Thanks in advance! :)

I'm having a hard time understanding how this answer choice follows logically from the premises.

Greetings, fellow 7Sagers and JY Ping fanboys (or fangirls). I'm hoping to use your collective brilliance to help solve a small dilemma I have regarding how to proceed in my studies. If you were slated to take the June 2016 test date, would you:

(A) Complete all of the 7Sage coursework and then take ALL of the prep tests (PTs 36-76) before the June test date. The goal here is to get as much practice as possible before the big day in June so that re-testing in Septemberis unnecessary. Let's call this the "eggs all in one basket" strategy.

(B) Complete all of the 7Sage coursework and then take MOST of the prep tests (PTs 36-65) before the June test. The goal here is to retain the remaining PTs (66-76) for practice, just in case I don't like my June score and want to improve by taking the LSAT again in September. Let's call this the "hedge your bets" strategy.

(C) Some other wonderful idea I have yet to think of (and of course, feel free to give that strategy the proper moniker of your choosing, as well).

Thanks in advance for all of your advice!

Hi all!

I seem to be struggling with main idea question on the RC portion. I usually narrow it down to 2 answers, but almost always choose the incorrect one. Did anyone else struggle with this? And what strategies did you use to overcome it?

I'm sitting for the Feb test, and if I could consistently get games to -1 or -0 as so many people say is possible then I'd be hitting 175+ on almost every test. I've read the games bible twice, I've done almost every game from preptests 7-38 several times with 7sage explanations, and yet I still can't seem to adapt to new wrinkles when I see a game for the first time. Time is an issue, as I constantly have to mechanically refer to the rules to check my work on questions. Diagramming any type of slightly unusual game is a huge problem. I'm particularly bad at seeing spatial patterns within games.

I don't know if I should stick with the strategy of repetition or what. Maybe the games will just get easier as I do the newer tests? I just have no confidence on this section whatsoever because my performance is so unreliable.

Any suggestions?

If A most are B and B most are C is it correct to say A most are C ?

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-34-section-2-question-18/

18. Editorialist: The positions advanced by radical environmentalists often contain hypotheses that are false and proposals that are economically infeasible. But there is a positive role to be played even by these extremists, for the social and political inertia that attends environmental issues is so stubborn that even small areas of progress can be made only if the populace fears environmental disaster, however untenable the reasons for those fears may be.

Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion of the editorialist’s argument?

(A) The little progress that has been made in improving the environment is mainly due to the fear created by radical environmentalists.

(B) Radical environmentalists, by promoting their views, stimulate progress on environmental issues.

(C) Social and political inertia is most effectively overcome by an extremely fearful populace, regardless of whether its fears are well-founded.

(D) Radical environmentalists often put forth untenable positions in order to produce the fear that is required to bring about moderate reforms.

(E) Radical environmentalists advocate positions without regard for factual support or economic feasibility.

I am debating between A and B...

Why can't A be the correct answer choice? Is it because of the word mainly? or is it because answer choice (a) is saying that fear is the sufficient condition for the little progress to be made while the stimulus is saying that fear is the necessary condition for the progress?

Also, D seemed a little bit tricky but I eliminated that since we don't really know from reading the stimulus alone that environmentalists purposely said false things to create fear.. Is this the right way of thinking?

The correct answer choice is B, by the way. Thank you in advance!

I had it down to A and D and chose D. With that said, can someone destroy my reasoning for why A is not the right answer so that this sticks...

Ok, so what if pollen is transported from one region to another by wind, and human movement, we would have to assume that the pollen transferred is indistinguishable from the pollen that is KNOWN to have been unique to that area.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-49-section-4-question-08/

I place a because after the statements of interest in the stimulus and the statement that makes sense with a because coming after it I deem to be the conclusion. Is this an ideal strategy for argument labeling and mp questions?

I'm confused how to write the conditional logic for this. Can somebody please explain this? When I see how the video skipped over labeling the first sentence like a premise, I got confused why he then uses it in conditional logic (TMU---> IASC)? I also got confused with what to do with the third sentence. I thought its a conclusion because of the keywords thus, until I got to the last sentence. I understand how he got the conclusion as /TMU.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-62-section-2-question-15/

I wrote out my conditional for answer choice E as this:

Independent--> (/TF and EB)

Is that ok?

The video wrote Independent and /TF--> EB.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-62-section-2-question-19/

I'm doing really badly on this question type. I am going to rewatch the videos and lesson for this question type, but does anyone have any advice on how I can improve?

When I did this question type in the past, I got frustrated and skipped to the next question type, but this time I want to master it and do well on it. If someone could give me some constructive advice, I would be most appreciative!