Discussions

LSAT

New post

100 posts in the last 30 days

I'm one of the 35% people that chose (B) and still am not fully convinced that (E) is better. To compare the two ACs, I'll list all potential objections/flaws they each have for them to work:

(B) says, salt is not the only dietary factors associated with high blood pressure. It takes for granted that the people in the question actually were consuming these other foods, and the intake of such foods in combination needs to be significant enough, not only to offset the effects of their high salt intake, but also to bring their blood pressure down to very low.

(E) says, some people have abnormally low blood pressure and they have heightened cravings for salt to maintain a blood pressure that's not too low. It assumes without justification that these people are in fact the people talked about in the stimulus, and their high salt intake was in fact the result of their heightened cravings.

I'll admit that (B) makes a lot of unwarranted assumptions. But the "cravings" in (E) really trips me up because I think the assumption of "heightened cravings for salt" implying "high salt intake" is the exact kind of bad assumptions that LSAT usually punishes us for making. My only justification for choosing (E) over (B) is that it makes fewer assumptions. Can someone please help me out on this one? This question is bothering me so much and I don't know what I need to do differently to avoid similar mistakes in the future. Any help is hugely appreciated!

0

Hi everyone,

Wondering if anyone has run into this issue. I've naturally been doing well with LR and RC. The 7sage courses helped me get to about an average of -1 on each of those sections. The problem is that I can't seem to get to a consistent -1 to -3 on LGs. Its especially frustrating given how everyone always talks about how it is the easiest section to learn.

I have used the foolproof method fairly extensively. Having done and redone every logic game from Tests 1 - 78. I can redo the sections and get -1/-0 when I do. I also made a tracker of harder and hardest games from Tests 1-78 and did and redid these until I could do them quicker than the recommended time. I've also redone the LG syllabus and whizzed through all the sections.

The problem is... I still am struggling to rap my head around new harder/hardest questions that pop on tests I haven't seen before, especially if its a miscellaneous game. Sometimes its due to panic but other times I am just genuinely stumped. This seems to happen on every new PT I take.

I am averaging low 170s with about -4 or -5 (sometimes worse) in the logic games. I recognize that I am fortunate o have a high base-line score but I have poured in 200+ hours into logic games and it remains my biggest obstacle to being a consistent mid 170 scorer.

Anyone have any advice or deal with the same issue? I've always been awful at puzzles!

1

I got 4 out of 5 right in this drill but got this particular questions drastically wrong. I selected B and on blind review selected C. I never felt E was correct during the drill or blind review. I do not know what I am not seeing on this particular question. I do not understand why C is incorrect. If 40% in the first group reported awaking paralyzed with a strange presence in the room, wouldn't it be correct to say 60% had not? Or is C wrong, because it only mentioned "strange presence" and excluded "paralyzed" as part of the answer? #help

0

Hey everyone,

So I went through the CC awhile ago probably a few months ago ( I've been reviewing it since ) and also have a book by the Princeton review that I'm using for RC/LR . -called cracking the lsat

Logic games is def. my area of weakness - I'm trying to work on that right now, but wanted to fool proof Lr and rc as I thought I was getting the hang of it.

I'm focusing more on review than PT's that's for sure -I've probably done about 5/6ish PT.

For LR , I'm getting about 13/14 right on each section and that hasnt changed much even though I'm studying.

Rc- really goes up low of 14, high of 18/19

I'm aiming for 150's /mid 150's (pref). Target - 155

I began with high 130s before 7sage- mid 140's - then high 140's, and I've gotten one with 152 (untimed).

But now my score is sitting in that plateau area and I don't know if it's moving fast enough to consistently get in the 155 area timed and on test day.

I study about 5-6 days a week , for about 5 hours give or take. (starting mid may) started studying for lsat mid jan (but that was when I was working) so I didn't get that much studying done. Right now I'm doing about 1 pt a week, reviewing the pt and then reviewing CC.

Now I'm doing timed PT .

Taking the july lsat, how many PTS should I be doing a week , timed/untimed - all timed from now on ?

After every pt I go through it and look at areas of weakness.

Not sure if it's just anxiety/ mind set OR if I'm missing an important step. How did you all study coming up to the LSAT ?

0

Wrong Answer (D) and Right Answer (E). I can't seem to reach the understanding on how E is relevant, e.g. doesn't contain information introduced in the passage on whether or not zebra mussels can transform hazardous waste and why they would be considered hazardous waste. I chose (D) because out of all the answers it seemed like the closest to being supported, as it mentions one of the 'redeeming qualities' of zebra mussels.

0

I can understand why (B) is correct - but not sure why (C) is wrong. I think I'm not understanding (C) correctly. What does it mean to "indicate the falsehood of the implications" of a hypothesis? Doesn't the author do so in the stimulus, by showing that predicting an invention according to the hypothesis necessarily entails inventing it (the implications), which would be self-contradictory? Is (C) wrong because self-contradiction ≠ falsehood? I'd really appreciate it if someone could give me an example of (C) since I'm not exactly sure I understand JY's example either.

Thanks in advance!

0

Hi all,

So I'm drilling a lot of LR timed sections using early PTs (10-20s) because I've kind of burned through the 40s and 50s repeatedly and I want to save the 60s onwards for full, fresh tests. Other than the two for one question-stimulus questions, I feel like once or so per section there's a misc. question stem (e.g. 13.4.17, 13.2.25).

I was just wondering, how common are these misc. question stems in the newest tests? I've done a few PTs in the 60s and 70s and remember there being fill in the blank questions, but nothing quite like this? I was just wondering whether or not these have made a comeback in any way, or if I should just ignore them.

My second question for high scorers in LR, what is your mindset like while taking a section? Currently, I'm experimenting with the balance between making myself go faster/stay on task, and staying calm enough to process everything yet not go too slow. Do you guys tend to lean in either direction? I know it's personal, but just curious.

Thanks!

0

On the 2007 prep test, I was unable to arrive at the correct conclusion for RC#13. I was confident that my answer was right and I even got it wrong during blind review. Even now, I’m unsure that I’d be able to deduce this quickly on a test. When I get to the RC section and begin doing drills, how can I study for this type of question? Are all Art, InfAP and Co questions similar?

0

I chose answer choice C because being the rock being submerged in water does not prove the conclusion that is falsifying the idea that life began in the ocean and did not exist on land until half a billion years ago.

Does anyone have an explanation for why C does support the conclusion and why D would be the answer for non-supporting? Thanks!

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

0

Hi everyone! I feel like I heard someone mention in the comments or maybe in the 7sage podcast that there is a way to foolproof LR, but I can't remember where I heard that or how to do it. Does anyone have any ideas?

0

PT F97.S1.Q18 – Roseville Courthouse

We are asked to identify the point at issue / disagreement between Mayor Tyler and Councillor Simon. Tyler suggested to build a new courthouse for the city of Roseville in 1982 for a price of 26 million dollars, but ‘now’ in 1992 the price of the courthouse is 30 million. Tyler uses these premises to infer that Roseville would have saved 4 million dollars if the courthouse had been built in 1982, as suggested. Tyler also mentions in passing that the existing courthouse has been overcrowded.

Simon responds by bringing in the topic of inflation: The 26 million dollars that the courthouse would have costed in 1982 are equivalent to 37 million in 1992 dollars. Simon takes this to show that Roseville actually saved money by not building the courthouse. Simon also mentions in passing that the courthouse, had it actually been built, would have been underutilized.

There thus are at least two disagreements in this exchange, one much more overt than the other: (1) Roseville was right not to build the courthouse in 1982: Tyler disagrees, Simon agrees. (2) Had the courthouse been built, it would have been put to good use: Tyler agrees, Simon disagrees. The answer choices are tricky in that four of them purport to get at this first disagreement while not actually resolving it. Only one answer choice, the correct one, gets at the second disagreement and actually resolves it:

(A) This gets at Roseville’s actions going forward, does not directly relate to either disagreement.

(B) This gets at the issue of inflation adjusted prices, does not directly relate to either disagreement.

(C) This gets at the extent of Tyler’s responsibility, does not directly relate to either disagreement.

(D) This does get at the second disagreement and points out one issue where Tyler and Simon disagree: Would a new courthouse actually have been needed / been put to good use? Tyler agrees, as Tyler proclaims the present courthouse overcrowded, i.e. insufficient to serve Roseville’s existing population spatially. Simon disagrees; states that a hypothetical larger courthouse would have remained underutilized. The disagreement is subtle, but definitely present.

(E) This confuses the issue of inflation adjustment with financial upkeep, purports to get at the first disagreement but actually misrepresents information from the passage, in an apparent attempt to confuse test takers who did not select one of the previous answers the first time around.

Takeaway: This is a tricky question in that there are two disagreements only one of which gets resolved. The question stem arguably hints at this by speaking of ‘A point of disagreement,’ rather than of ‘The point of disagreement;’ i.e. the question stem leaves open the possibility of multiple disagreements. Nevertheless, this question demands some reflection. Read stimulus and answer choices more than once to get at the nuance of the issues at play. Do process of elimination for the wrong answer choices. If necessary, flag the question the first time around and return to it at the end of the section.

0

Hi all, could someone please help me with this question? Its a small grammar thing, but I am stuck!

Obviously, we cannot in any real sense mistreat plants (MP). Plants do not have nervous systems (NS), and having a nervous system is necessary to experience pain. (EP)

The conclusion above follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?__

P: EP -> NS

Plants: /NS

So, /NS -> /EP

C: /MP

A: /NS -> /EP -> /MP

Or, MP -> EP -> NS

I think I know why the correct answer is: "Only organisms that can experience pain can be mistreated". But the other answer choices use the word "any" instead of "only". Is there a difference in the two for sufficient assumption questions ?

Thank you so much!

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-25-section-4-question-18/

0

Stimulus says: Manners are necessarily social (i.e. manners require a social element). Morals are not necessarily social (i.e. morals do not require a social element). Rules of etiquette do not apply to situations with morals or manners alone.

Things I noted upon reading:

  • If manners apply, we better see a social element.

  • Morals may apply if there is a social element. Morals may not apply if there is a social element.

  • Morals may apply if there is NOT a social element. Morals may not apply if there is NOT a social element.

  • Rules of etiquette will not apply to a situation that is purely moral or purely manners.

  • Rules may or may not apply to a situation that is both moral and manners.

    • Most strongly supported?

    A: You can be immoral without causing harm. (i.e. you can not be moral in a case that is not social). Yep, this fits with #3 above.

    B: An immoral act is never a violation of etiquette. This could be false if the situation also involved manners, so we can´t say it is supported.

    C: Morality applies only when one is alone. I think you´d only choose this if you were hella confused.

    D.: It is more important... I stopped reading right there and knew this was wrong. There is no comparison being made in the stimulus.

    E: A social situation will never have anything to do with morality. Clearly wrong based on #2 and #3 described above.

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

    0

    I answered (C): I thought this would be right because it was the statement that was most backed up by what is in the stimulus.

    The right answer is (E):I was battling between C and E, but I didn't pick E because it seemed like a statement although true, the stimulus was not supporting it directly.

    Can someone explain why E is correct and why C is wrong? I feel like I am overthinking this.

    Admin note: Edited title and post; please use the format of "PT#.S#.Q# - [brief description]." Also, please review the Forum rules "Do not post LSAT questions", the title format helps others reference the PT and question. Thanks!

    0

    Hey everyone

    I am looking for an Active LSAT Discord Server. I am prepping to take the LSAT June 2023. I am also looking for partners to study with preferably once a week. I am a non traditional student who works full time but my schedule is different everyday so I have some flexibility. This will not be my first time taking the LSAT. Looking to score in the 165 range!

    0

    Confirm action

    Are you sure?