Hi! I am having difficulty with predicting descriptive flaw questions. If anyone has done this question can you please explain to me how the correct answer is D.

Getting started for September test, and would definitely want to meet up a few times over the summer before September 27th.

I work on the Hill but also commute out to Annapolis and Bethesda area, if anyone else is preparing and wants to meet up.

Has anyone tried this before? I plan on doing it on the PT I take tomorrow and I feel like it could be a legitimate strategy. My RC is consistently my most weakest section, usually 5 min is called as i begin the last passage and the last passage is just about always stacked in regards to the number of questions and the degree of difficulty. This leaves me with precious little time to get through a difficult passage that carries with it a lot of points. At the same time I've noticed that the first passage is consistently the easiest, in terms of structure and content, and is usually accompanied with fewer questions. So my thinking is that I'll be pressed for time right at the end with (hopefully) an easier passage in front of me carrying with it less weight (number of questions).

Has anyone tried this approach before? If so, what did you think?

So my question is about Step 5 "Watch the explanation video." and Step 6 "Take a clean copy of the game.

Reproduce all inferences from memory with control and speed. "

Should I be repeating the game right after watching the video? Trying to reproduce all inferences from memory?

If so, I feel like a complete fool :) I've been watching the videos right after a game I feel I haven't mastered, then waiting a day before I try the game again...And well that hasn't gotten me to where I want to be, so I rewatched the video and I'm thinking I could have been doing it wrong this whole time...

Hi guys,

Just wanted to let you know that registration is now open for the following dates:

- September 2014

- December 2014

- February 2015

For those who are taking the June test and wish to postpone, please note that you only have 7 days to do so since the deadline is May 25 (at least in Europe).

J.Y. has repeatedly told us not to erase in the LG section but to cross out, especially when we are making our game board.

I'm a notorious eraser and wanted to know why its bad to erase?

Does this take up more time for me? I don't want to cross out bc I'm nervous I will look at what I had crossed out under pressure.

The erasing thing has been bugging me all week and wanted to know why we should erase what so ever.

Hey everyone,

So today I wrote PT 65, and I was a writing the second LR section, I thought to myself that it seemed considerably harder than usual. I was just wondering if anyone else thought that? The first LR for PT 65 I went -6, but the second section nailed me and I went -11. I felt like a lot of the answers were very difficult to read and understand (more than usual) and that a lot of the answers were very difficult to distinguish between two answer choices. Clearly I need to work on my LR, but looking to see if it was just a fluke and that it was reasonably more difficult or if I really do need to improve THAT much more.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-47-section-1-question-24/

This is what I don't understand how answer B can be eliminated, "the manufacturer's instructions for assembling a product should be written in such a way that most CONSUMERS would find it much easier to put the product together" answer choice B says that someone OTHER than the consumer will assemble it for them, therefore, the suggestion does not apply because the consumer themselves do not have to assemble the product, so weather the instructions change or not the subject of the argument is not affected and therefore irrelevant, making answer B ideal. Am I over analyzing this too much or what?

help me obi-wan, your my only hope...

Hi!

So there are 23 days left until the June LSAT.

I have been scoring around 160-165 on PTs.

Do you think this website will help me raise my score 5+ points? I'm not sure if an investment in the online class is worth it if it won't help increase my score significantly.

Thank you!

- Rahul

For four months now, I have been drilling logic games heavily, printing out ten copies, redoing them over and over again.....But although I did improve (went from a minus 16 to a minus 10), I stopped improving after the first month of drilling logic games. I still average a minus 10....so frustrating.

One thing I've been wondering is, do you have to be good at math (or at least have a knack for math) to ace this game? I've sucked at math for the longest time, and when practicing the LSAT logic games I can't help but think back to when I was in the 9th grade and I was looking at a mathematical word problem going blank while everyone else was gettin' it....

So now I've changed my strategy. Not only do I print out 10 copies, redoing them ten times each, but I also spend some time analyzing them, taking notes on how the rules interact with each other and what inferences I should have made from them, playing around with the game board by rearranging the rules etc...

So how long did it take you guys to finally perfect the logic games section? Please tell me I have hope...

can you please put up a list of circular games, i know there are not many, but trying to avoid another February shocker!

Hey all,

I'm debating right now on how I should approach the June 2014 LSAT. This will be my first time taking the test and I'm currently in study mode. Most days I study for a minimum of 5 hours a day, 8-9 if I don't have a long day of work. However, I've been debating as to whether or not I should postpone taking the LSAT until September 2014 and I would like a second opinion on whether or not this is worth doing.

My goal score is a minimum of 164 with a high expectation of 170. My scores on my original untimed practice tests (used for making sure I understood the material and how each question worked in detail) would land anywhere between 165-172. My current timed scores are 160-161. My test is June 29th, (I believe this date may be different from others as I'm taking the test in Taiwan) leaving me six more weeks of prep time. I take one new practice test every weekend, followed by a review of the practice test. I also do two reading comprehension articles each day, speed reading drills, one timed LR section, and numerous LG's.

Based on this information, do you think it's possible to reach the desire score in the allotted amount of time? Or should I put on the brakes for the test, postpone until September, and give myself more time to prepare?

Thanks, everyone!

Hi guys... Maybe these are obvious and I'm missing something but I couldn't really find an answer online so I was hoping someone can help me out with some general questions regarding correlation.

If given a statement of positive correlation such as "as A increases, B increases," how much can we validly infer?

Can we infer all of...

-as A dec B dec

-as B dec A dec

-as B inc A inc

Also for negative correlation -"as A increases, B decreases"

Can we infer all of...

-as A dec B inc

-as B inc A dec

-as B dec A inc

Thanks in advance :)

Hello all,

Whenever you start applying rules to arrive at inferences, do you go methodically through your list of rules with each piece of info you have? For example, if you know that V is in, do you go through each of your [however many] rules AND THEN take another piece of info you get from what you found with V being in and go methodically through your rules with THAT piece of info?

Or, rather, do you see what happens when V is in and "let the inferences fly from your pencil", so to speak? I have noticed that I do it this way naturally, and while it is quite an amazing feeling when all those inferences come together and it's just like bam-bam-bam, I feel like I may get a piece of information from an inference and then forget to apply a rule to it.

For example, if, from an inference I made, I discover that Z must be in, and Z being in kicks two rules, I feel like if I do not go through the rules methodically with my new piece of information, I might miss one of the rules that Z being in kicks.

But the problem with going methodically through the rules is that it seems unintuitive. I feel that it is much more intuitive to just let the inferences fly off my pencil than to take each piece of info I get and methodically go through the rules, even though the "let the inferences fly" way seems more error-prone.

So do you think it is dangerous to just let the inferences fly off you pencil, instead of taking each piece of info you have and applying it to each rule in your rule list?

how to indicate this logic "A and B cannot be selected together",

is it "A->/B" correct? or sth. else?

then it will be the same as "not both" rule?

really confused...

Hi fellow 7sagers,

As a review tonight I decided to write down steps I take for weakening questions. I’d appreciate any response to this question I have... PLEASE! It’s been bothering me for the past 2 hours. I realize that this might require going to the videos that I refer to below – so I thank you in advance for your time spent!

For Weaken Qs, we are taught to attack the premise-conclusion relationship; that is, the support for our conclusion. So I tried to come up with an example:

If the Premise/Conclusion is: TV sales increase, because Survey A indicates so.

A trap answer choice would be ‘Survey B indicates otherwise’ (right?) because sure, Survey B is a contradiction, but our premise about Survey A still holds true and we can’t doubt its validity since it was given to us.

This is corroborated by a video explanation I watched, PT 60 Section 1 Question 13 (in short – there’s an answer choice (B) saying Survey X says some dangerously out of scope stuff – but our premise is about Survey Y saying whatever to support the conclusion.)

BUT I was watching the “Serious Medical Condition – Weaken Question” video lesson and in that question, Answer Choice (A) serves as a perfectly acceptable weaken-er! But it is another one of those ‘in another study....this was shown...” !!

So does that type of answer choice weaken the argument? Help appreciated!! Thank you :)

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-62-section-2-question-17/

I feel like i am almost there with S.A. questions.

Thank you J.Y.!

But I had some major problems diagraming the conclusion of this question.

Can someone please help?

Premise: For W/O health, happiness is not obtainable. Lawgic translation: negate sufficient

OH-->HE

Conclusion: One should never sacrifice ones health in order to acquire money …. ?!?!?!

thats as far as i got with this question.

Please help!

Thank you in advance!

I was stuck between D and E and I finally chose D because it looks like more reasonable than E.

But I still don't get why D is right and E is wrong and see what's the difference which makes them a right/wrong answer between them.

Can anyone explain me why D is the answer and E isn't?

Thanks!

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-4-section-2-passage-4-questions/

I chose B based on line 3~5 because I think it's the only part about "a book" mentioned in Q27, but the answer is E.

I read the passage twice again, but I still have no idea why B is wrong and E is the right answer.

Can anyone explain me? :(

Thanks!

Can someone give me some feed back on this? The reasoning denies a conclusion in order to show a premise is false. Is that an acceptable method of argumentation? I know that conditionally, if A->B, then negation B = negation A, but does that hold true in this argument? Namely, the argument intends to show that the premise in sentence 1 is false by showing that the conclusion it supports in sentence 2 is false. Is that a valid form of argumentation? Would really appreciate some help on this point; i will clarify if my description is not descriptive enough.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-57-section-2-question-11/

Can anyone help me with these types of questions? It is consistently one of these types that is the only LR question I get wrong, and I haven't been able to find a system to really figure out what they want. I always have it down to two possible answers - how do I know exactly what they want? Time is not an issue, I just need a method.

good morning all ,

hope your Easter was fun!!

NA-they are kicking my butt!

negating the right answer usually will get me only a few correct but for the most part it confuses me.

when approaching necessary assumptions my mind reverts to Sufficient assumption techniques because I don't have a clear understanding of how to attack necessary assumptions.

what approach did you use , or how did you overcome necessary assumption questions?

help me my fellow LSAT warriors !

I am having a really hard time wrapping my head around Negating "All" I am in the section about "Some and Most Relationships."

If All-->Most-->Some and the negation of Some is None, then why isn't the negation of All then None?

I don't understand how we reach "Some...not..." I tried replaying the video and reading comments but it just doesn't click

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-3-section-3-passage-1-questions/

I chose D, but the answer is C.

Doesn't the passage talk about theoretician's perspective about the satellites of asteroids?

I can't see why D can't be an answer.

Can anyone explain me why D is wrong and C is right?

Thanks!

I have a question about the strategy of answering questions.

It takes me around three to four minutes to read the whole passage and I can understand most of it and memorize/summerize before solving questions.

However, it usually takes me too much time to answer questions. For example, 3 mins to read a passage, but 6 to 7 mins to answer questions. So of course, I usually run out of time to take RC.

It drives me crazy even if I understand the passage when I read.

So I have no idea why it takes me so much time and what I'm going to reduce the time to work out questions.

Can anyone give me some advice?