http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-41-section-3-question-02/

I'm little confused about B.

The stimulus said Samantha likes both oolong and green tea and none of her friends likes both.

Doesn't it mean none of her friends like both oolong and green tea?

Since none of her friends likes oolong and green tea, shouldn't B be Must be false?

How is it possible B is could be true? What am I missing?

And if the stimulus said Samantha likes EITHER oolong OR green tea and none of her friends likes both, can B be Must be false?

Please someone explain me.

Thanks!

Hi everyone,

Just finished the 7sage instruction curriculum. Now onto PTing: for the Dec exam, my plan was to go PT 36-75 every other day, and review some material on the days in between (or look at stuff like Trainer drills/flaw section). My diagnostic was not very high, 148, but I got a 154 the other day (yay for me...) anyways I was wondering if you guys think I should try to start at the lower pts, (before 36) ? I know JY says they're not really a good representation of the current exam but maybe it could help if I start a little lower and did a PT every day? What do you guys think? I'd appreciate the advice. And thanks everyone for the advice you've given so far. As you can tell I'm kind of an LSAT noob.

If you would like to join just send me a msg with your Skype handle.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-59-section-3-question-24/

Answer is E. What does this even mean? :O

E) "presumes,without providing justification, that 18 century European aesthetics is as encompassing as an aesthetic theory can be"

I have a question on negation. On prep test 58 section 1 question 25. the line Handmade foundations are never found on wigs that do not use human hair. Is diagrammed as HF------>HH. Shouldn't it be ~HF ------> HH. It is group 4. So you pick an idea ~HH, you negate it ~HH --->HH AND MAKe it necessary. The other idea is the sufficient. So how do we end up with HF INSTEAD OF -HF?

Shouldn't it be

~HF ---> HH?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-58-section-1-question-25/

Hi JY! I don't quite understand this answer choice as I eliminated option A and B as they mention water levels - which aren't specifically addressed by the passage. Could you please help me out with an explanation for this?

Hey Everyone,

I remember someone on TLS who recommended reading Bill Bryson's "A Short History of Nearly Everything" and it was not only fantastic but also helped me get acquainted with different topics in the sciences. Looking for a BOOK suggestion related to humanities/law that I can read in my spare time. Thanks!

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-41-section-1-question-09/

Hi, while solving MSS questions, I often confront the situation in which whether I should use logical translation or not.

For example, in this question,

as the passage states "technological improvements will enable food production to increase as population increase," I translate it to TI --> FPI.

Then, according to the statement "increases in food production will be negligible unless societies become more centralized..." I translate it into FPI --> SC.

Thus, I got TI --> FPI --> SC.

This is why I chose the answer choice (E) which I thought as TI --> SC.

Perhaps this type of logical translation might not be appropriate for this question, so could you point out what was a problem in my reasoning and further explain when is the time I should use logical translation or not?

Thanks!

Hi All,

With the October test fast approaching, I've been doing the PTs in the late 60s (think 65-69). Before that I had done every test from 35-55. While these later PTs been in my normal range for the most part (low to mid 160s), the past couple have been awful (158/159-awful in the sense that my scores haven't been this low in a long time).

I've noticed that while I'm able to take my time and understand the questions in BR (last BR I got a 171), I feel rushed and find myself stumbling through the test under timed conditions. This hadn't been such a major problem in the past and I'm not sure what I can do to remain accurate while also maintaining a good pace. During the last PT I took, I actually got distracted during the end of the RC section and had to rush through the last passage :(

Do you think this is just that the PTs are harder or that I'm psyching myself out by thinking that this is what the October test will be like? Is it burnout? What can I do to make sure my score doesn't stay at this level?

Thanks for your help!

I would like some suggestions about how to BR reading comp. I just started the practice exams today (#36), and I am wondering what other people typically do with this section.

Can we please discuss why the answer is C instead of A? :o boggles my mind. I checked out the manhattan prep forum for their explanations but i didn't like them.

From this link :) its the second to last questions. Thnx so much guys.

http://classic.7sage.com/lesson/necessary-assumptions-questions-problem-set-8

Also here:

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-26-section-3-question-09/

Hey guys I have a question about this question beginning with, "it is clear that none of the volleyball players at yesterday's office."

Is A incorrect because goes from making a statement about all the employees at TRF who were offered the insurance to a conclusion about employees in general.

In short my first question is I see that the answer choice jumps from a statement about "everyone employed by TRF who was given the opportunity to purchase dental insurance" to all employees. The author is assuming that all employees at TRF were given the opportunity to purchase d.insurance. What if some workers had other insurance and chose to keep that insurance; and maybe those employees with the outside insurance chose not to go to the dentist. That could be true, but the choice doesn't leave room for the possibility. Is this why A is incorrect?

2) I am a little unclear on why D is correct. I didn't choose D because I was unsure if I could assume that taking time off= vacation time, (sometimes the LSAT gets you for shifts in phrasing and I didn't want to fall prey to this another time)

Help would be greatly appreciated

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-19-section-4-question-07/

in my timed approach I was confident w answer choice E however in the blind review changed my response to D. During blind review I thought I was making an assumption about the bones having been examined. Where as D focused more on what was evident just by excavating the tomb. Help explaining why D is wrong is appreciated.

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

I got this question correct since C was obviously not relevant to the argument, but during BR, I can't seem to eliminate B or E. Why are these necessary assumptions? Here is my breakdown so far:

This is a necessary assumption EXCEPT question. Specifically, we are looking at the skeptic's argument.

Some people have been promoting some herbs to help treat colds. The herbs have a whole bunch of colorful sounding stuff in them: purple coneflower and goldenseal. This dude with a cold doesn't think that the herbs help. He argues, "Say that the herbs actually did work. Most people want to get better quickly. Therefore, almost everybody with a cold would already be using. Since there are many who have colds but don't use it, herbs aren't effective."

What I am looking for: I know we are looking for a NA, but I always like to break down the flaws in the argument if there are any. The skeptic is all over the place. He conflates "most" with "almost everybody." Certainly "most" includes "almost everybody," but 51% is "most" but would probably not be considered "almost everybody." Additionally, so what of "many" people still have colds? The proponents of herbs never said that herbs have a 100% effectiveness rate. Even worse, the skeptic's conclusion is borderline circular as well. The skeptic says that "almost everybody would be using it." He did NOT say that everyone would use it; there could be "many" or "some" people that don't use the herbs in the skeptic's hypothetical world. Anyway, we are looking for an answer that is a necessary assumption.

Answer A: This is a NA. If this answer was not true, then how could almost everyone be using it? There wouldn't be enough.

Answer B: I don't see how this is a NA. If you negate it: the mixture does have side effects severe enough to make many people with colds avoid it, then how does this wreck the argument? Wouldn't this strengthen the argument's conclusion that the herbs are not effective? The negation seems to do the opposite of wreck the argument.

Answer C: This is what I correctly chose because the argument does not concern itself with anything preventative. This answer does nothing to the argument, and it is totally irrelevant.

Answer D: This is similar to A, and it is a NA. If you negate it: if the herbs are not widely known, then how would people know to use it?

Answer E: This is like answer choice B for me. I don't see how this is a NA. What if there are effective cold remedies that people prefer? Does this mean that the herbs are not effective? I don't see how this affects the argument.

While I've seen my LG and LR improve a lot over time, I'm afraid I've plateaued a bit in RC. On average I make -4. I've already done the whole 7sage curriculum (twice) and I'm reading the LSAT Trainer for the second time. Does anyone recommend the RC Manhattan Prep for RC? I saw it's $10 on Amazon, but I was just wondering if it was worth my time to read through it. Any thoughts or advice on this question and more generally the RC section would be appreciated :)

I am taking the LSAT in October, but I am still struggling with the logic games. What are the best advice on how to get better in this section. I am not doing well at all.

For the regular weaken and strengthen questions, I am starting to get better. However, when it comes to causation, I am really confused. There is so much information to take in.

Can someone please give me some pointers?

Hey, Im working my way through the RC section and have a couple quick questions. For doing the memory Method is it best that I print out the RC questions and do it by hand or is it fine to just look at the screen, read through it, then look away and try to recall? I know this may be a personal preference thing. JY says to flip over the page. Im struggling to get this method to work for me and it seems to be taking me large amounts of time so if someone could give me a little more insight and detailed or even semi detailed explanation into their process that would be very helpful to me.

I went through the explanation video again and realized that my summaries at the end of the paragraph where way to long so I will have to cut that down.

I was out for a run yesterday and crashed and burned - hard. It was really only a matter of time before I managed to lose a little skin in the name of fitness, but I never imagined that I would end up with a broken elbow, which is what the urgent care doc diagnosed. So, I'm in a sling and temporary cast (and doing everything with one hand...) and while I likely won't need surgery, I will probably be in a cast come October 3. I've never broken a bone before and would appreciate any thoughts or insight about what test day might look like.

Hi guys, I wanted to share an idea that may be helpful in improving RC. One of my biggest stumbling blocks in RC is freezing when I run into topics I'm unfamiliar with (science and economics, mostly). Reading articles on Scientific American and the Economist have been very helpful to increase my familiarity with certain terms. Another tool that came to mind this morning is Wikipedia.

Wikipedia has a "Random Article" link on the left sidebar, and sends you to a completely random Wikipedia article. I feel like this could also be helpful as a means to gaining familiarity with unfamiliar topics. For example, a few that came up were a description of birds in Yemen, an English journalist and publicist named Derek Taylor, and Secretary of State for Scotland. You may have to click a couple times to find something that could be useful, but some of the topics are really out there... like LSAT RC passages.

Obviously, this can't replace any of the main RC study tools like doing actual RC sections, reading dense articles, etc., but it could be useful if you just have a few minutes here or there.

Hey guys! I have just started going over the lessons for the games and am feeling discouraged. I always don't make enough inferences and have difficulty solving the problems. How long did it take you guys to start doing well on them? Thanks!

I currently own pdf copies of prep tests 37-67. With test day nearing, I want to purchase prep tests 68-75.

For those of you who have taken the lsat or know how the real test looks like, would I be better served buying the pdf copies and printing them out or buying the booklet paperback form on Amazon?

I am mostly concerned with similarity to the actual test.

Thanks!

There's probably no hard and fast rule for determining whether it's more beneficial to devote time upfront to splitting a game board into different scenarios, but I am wondering what people consider and what factors really convince top test-takers to split it as such. I haven't gotten into the habit of it and so far, I don't think it has been detrimental. When it comes to really complicated games, such as the notorious dinosaur game (PT 57), JY took the time to flesh the master board into 6 different scenarios. How do I know when to do this? I'm not very good at making this call and one of my biggest fears is ultimately wasting the time I spend on inferences upfront (in the form of extra boards, not just inferences in general).

So Ive been using the BR method strictly on reading comp for the last couple of days and my accuracy has improved tremendously but EVERY time Im incorporating time into the process, my accuracy goes down significantly. Im currently aiming at 3.5 min for reading and the last 4.5-5 doing the questions. Any suggestions? Also, any passage that has 7-8 questions immediately has meant I wont get through all the questions. It freaks me out haha

Okay so I'm pretty much at my wit's end here with the last 2 or 3 tests I've taken.

As background, I used to be incredibly consistent on the Logical Reasoning section. I would typically miss 1 or 2 per section and would never miss more than 3 overall in both sections combined. This was the case for most of the PTs I took. Then PT50 happened. I thought I was just having a bad day, and ended up missing 5 LRs that test. Then on PT51 I missed 3 (not more than usual) but then today on PT52 I missed 5 again.

Ironically, I'm at the point where I'm getting 180s on nearly every single Blind Review I do. I'm overall pretty accurate at never missing questions that I don't circle, but now I feel like just as I've gotten really good at understanding how to answer nearly any LR question and answering them all accurately and not falling for any of the tricks (untimed) I've also gotten way worse on the actual timed PT. This is hugely frustrating for me since, before this started happening, I was consistently scoring around 174-175 and was weakest in the RC section (with LG nearly always at -0). I spent a week or two and really drilled RC hard and was able to get myself down from nearly -4 or -5 to -2 or -3 each time. But now LR has gone off the rails! I feel like I can't win!

At first I thought it was my strategy for balancing time on LR. Previously, I would skip almost any question I didn't immediately feel comfortable with or thought would take a while (even if they were easy MBTs that I just didn't want to diagram out). Now, I've tried to spend more time just going through the test a bit more linearly so that I don't feel strapped on time having to go back to a bunch of skipped questions at the end of the test. I thought this would be a good strategy but it seems now like I'm missing more questions anyway.

So I'm not sure what to do. On today's test it was hugely disappointing that 2 of the LR questions I missed were incredibly trivial and had more to do with the fact that it seems like I rushed through the question because of time than that I didn't understand it, and, again, I'm able to correct every mistake in Blind Review.

Not exactly sure what to help me improve at this point. I feel too confident to review basic lessons on LR questions (again, I get nearly a perfect score in blind review, so I obviously understand the concepts, its just that something mysterious happens on the timed tests) and I don't really know what else to do other than to look back at questions that I got wrong, but seeing as they're spread pretty evenly across different question types randomly, not sure how good that would do me either. Anyone experience anything like this before?