I got this question correct by POE since B-E were totally irrelevant. However, during BR, I am having a very hard time explicitly justifying why A is correct. How does this strengthen the idea that Homer was not translated into Arabic? Doesn't it sort of suggest the opposite since the translators had possession of the epics? I know that I am assuming too much when I say that it suggests that the translators actually translated the epics, but wouldn't this be a more reasonable assumption than assuming that they either consciously didn't translate them? or they just left them on their shelves forgotten?

I picked E but the answer is C. And I still don't understand why E is wrong.

I think E also can weaken the conclusion since it says "The physical effort~~~~does not stimulate circulation enough to warm your hands."

So Why can't E be an answer? And why is C right?

What's the difference between them?

Please someone explain me.

Thanks!

I don't see how D seriously undermines the hypothesis. How do we know anything about the death of diatoms? For this answer to work, you have to assume that Antarctic diatoms die near Antarctica (why can't they move or float away, or the death shells float away?) Lastly, don't you have to assume that the sediment left by the death shells would be indicative of a population increase? Aren't life and death two totally different ideas?. How are we supposed to know that these are OK assumptions?

Take for instance A (just for the sake of argument, I understand that A is incorrect). I think A would work if you assume diatoms of today are similar to diatoms during the ice age. You would also need to assume that the "unusually large amounts of ferrous material" that does not exist today would not promote a further increase in their population today. How are these assumptions less reasonable than the ones needed for D to be correct?

Hey! So I think I'm confusing myself but the game states: Telemarketing will not be given until both Goals and Objections have been given.

then the next rule:

Negotiating will not be given until Persuasion has been given.

I thought I could make both Telemarketing and Negotiating the sufficient, negate them, then make the others the necessary...Why is that not the case?

Thanks in advance for your help!

Hello,

I do not know of anyone else taking the lsat so i am just posting my concerns here ;)

I took my 1st lsat on Feb of last year got a 141. (hardly studied, and was full time study and work)...i retook the next lsat in June and got a 149 with almost 2 months of studying. English is not my 1st language and its very hard for me to sometime understand the sayings or tone in the lsat. Since my immigration status does not allow me to have private or federal loans in this country I need at least more than 160 to get some money for law school. I live in South Florida with T4/5 law schools that will freely give money. The tier of school is not an issue for me.

Im planning to take the lsat in june of 2016. I have been trying to get back to it since august. I am working on LR since its my hardest section but cannot get out of 15-17 right in timed sections . I need at least 20 or more right. I have gone trough the whole curriculum and seems that I am getting most MBT/SA/NA mid to hard questions right but then the easy or mid main conclusion or weakening questions I sometimes get wrong..with stupid mistakes. When I do the blind review I usually get the right answer but I keep making the same mistakes. I go over everything and the lessons but still same mistakes. I do not know if its my concentration or i need more timed practice. Can you guys advice on what techniques to use for these 8 months leading to the test and to get out of the 15-17 range? Thank you ;)

I have the hardest time with these questions. It's like I can't find the relevant paragraph because the statement/statements is so subtle under time constraints that they are easy to miss. By nature I tend to overthink everything which doesn't help. Does anyone have any advice on these questions?

Hey guys I just started started studying for the LSAT and I've watched some 7Sage videos for LR and I've noticed that J.Y usually reads the question before the stimulus and I was just wondering whether or not if that was recommended for test takers or if that is just a technique he uses for the videos. Thank you.

This is another one that just baffles me. I don't understand how D is a necessary assumption. I also don't really understand how C is not correct. Here was my breakdown:

Country X should institute a nationwide system of air/ground transportation for getting seriously hurt people to trauma centers (this is the MP). Why should they do this? Quick access to the medical care that only these specialized centers can provide can save lives (this seems like a pretty good reason). The earnings of these people would increase country X's GNP. Also, the taxes on these earnings would increase government revenues.

What I am looking for: The argument is assuming that the reasons why country X should put in the system are good reasons. Additionally, the argument is assuming that the new air/ground system wouldn't cost the government more than the increase in tax revenue from the earnings of the saved people.

Answer A: Why do we need to assume that per-capita income is the same? Sure, this would strengthen the argument (I think), but it isn't necessary.

Answer B: This also isn't necessary. In fact, I think the argument weakly implies that specialized trauma centers already exist in country X. If they didn't, where would the air/ground systems link to?

Answer C: After typing this out, I think I get why this one is wrong. This answer choice doesn't paraphrase one of the things I was looking for very well at all. We don't need to assume that the trauma centers are more costly, but that the air/ground system is. Also, this answer choice isn't even talking about costs to the government, so you would have to assume that is, which we can't do.

Answer D: This is the correct answer, but whaaa? I looked up the GNP formula (it's been a while since Econ101), but it is consumption+Gov Exp+Investments+Exports+Foreign Production by domestic companies-Domestic Production by foreign companies. Why must there be a net increase in employment? Even if this answer choice wasn't referencing the GNP formula (which I don't really think this answer was since the passage would have probably defined GNP if it were relevant), I still don't see how net employment MUST increase. What if the surviving people just kept their same job/didn't get fired/didn't leave because of the injury? Couldn't net employment stay the same? For this answer to even possibly work, don't you have to make the dubious assumption that the earnings of the surviving people increase net employment? Huh?

Answer E: Automobile accidents? Way to specific for a NA

I don't understand how A is better than D. Isn't the conclusion in the passage stating that the belief is incorrect? Doesn't D mirror this? A's conclusion isn't parallel since it states that the actual thing (unicorns) don't exist. Shouldn't it say that the belief in unicorns is false?

PT 52 is the first PT with comparative passages (I think), and although I didn't think the one in 52 was that bad, I still somewhat struggled keeping the two passages straight in my mind. What are your strategies for attacking comparative passages? Do you read them exactly the same way as "normal" RC passages?

I just recently decided to take the LSAT and I am studying for the Dec. test. I am nervous that I will not be ready for the Dec. test and end up taking the Feb. test. For personal reasons, I really want to start school in Fall 2016 and not wait another year. My top two school choices both are still accepting applications until the beginning of April and one is accepting until May. However, both are on rolling admissions, which I know significantly will lower my chances.

I guess I need some guidance if it is unrealistic to think that applying that late in the game will still get me in for the upcoming Fall. Taking the test in February would give me more time to prepare and I would most likely get a higher LSAT score but it puts me applying so late in the process.

Any advice or opinions is greatly appreciate!

OKAY WHAT IS THIS QUESTION????? I've looked it up on Manhattan's forum, cause they have most of the questions already written out, but I STILL don't understand it. This whole test was a beast to be honest...

I know this is a sufficient assumption question. So far, I have:

~SS

C --> IH

~IH --> ~C

--------------------------------

D --> IH

(SS = send spacecraft) (C = communicate) (IH = intelligent as humans) (D = determine existence)

How do we get to answer D, or I guess a better way to put it would be how do I figure out what the assumption is using the formal logic like JY does?

P.S. Sorry I'm needy tonight

Hi Everyone,

I will officially finish 7sage curriculum tomorrow. It has taken me longer to get through the curriculum than expected according to my study schedule, but I felt that it was important for me to take my time understanding each point of the curriculum in depth. I started at the beginning of August, but have had some previous LSAT training in the past, so I feel confident about where I'm at in my understanding and in my decision to take my time.

However, part of me is frustrated with myself now because I'm having fears about the # of practice tests i will be able to take before December. I want to preface that I absolutely have to take the LSAT in December, this is not something i can put off nor is it something I want to put off (I've studied for the LSAT on and off for year, finally quit my job and moved home so i could dedicate sufficient time to studying for this). I know in a perfect world I would put it off until February and have more time with practice tests, but that is not an option at this point in my life for several reasons, so i need advice for the best possible outcome of my situation. I will obviously retake in February if needed, but my score has to count in December.

So, my question is: how many practice tests a week would you recommend me taking in order to most benefit from testing experience, blind review, and not burning out before December 5? I am a huge fan of Blind Review and see the difference in my ability to retain information after doing it, so by no means do I want to race through 40 tests without feeling I've done adequate review of each test. My only job is to study for the LSAT, so I have unlimited time to study/take PTs.

Thanks for your help,

Liz

I was expecting to be in the 165 plateau for a while but now it's been too long - I've been here since August! I know I must be doing something wrong. Recently I've been drilling LG and I BR my tests, but what's the most effective strategy to take in this last month and half I have left? I usually score -4 to -5 on RC, and my LR goes from -1 to -9 ..... I don't know why it fluctuates so much, and there isn't any consistency in what I get wrong

I took the October LSAT last week. Despite having purchased my account in March, I never really started until August.

However, my scores improved significantly during that month and a half, and based on my most recent PTs before the test, my score will most likely be in the range I would need to be competitive in the schools I will be applying to.

I would still like to take the December LSAT just in case my scores are on the lower side of my average. Unfortunately, the scores come out after the initial deadline for December. I wouldn't mind just going ahead and signing up, since a possibly better second score would also make me a stronger candidate for scholarships, but I don't want to be held up in the rolling admissions process. Does anyone know how schools deal with applications with a second test score pending? Do I need to specifically tell them to go ahead and regard my application as complete or is that the default action?

Thanks alot.

I am scoring consistently in the LR and LG sections of my PT's, usually -3 total for LR and -0 for LG save some dumb mistakes on occasion that have diminished now that my timing is doing amazing after drilling nearly all LG for 1-38.

BUT- my reading comp just isn't improving nor is it consistent. Sometimes I do pretty well, like -2,-3 and other times I ruin my entire score with like an -8. I am just looking for any guidance that any of you used that led to improvement. Timing and accuracy are both issues for me, I can't seem to get a good internal clock for RC and regularly run out of time.

I know that practice, practice, practice is key but any specific strategies are welcome. I just ordered the Trainer solely for the reading comp lessons because Im that desperate.

Like I said, any tips or strategies that helped you are welcome.

Can someone please help me with this question, i do not get where some came from in correct answer ?

How many times am I using the method on one passage? Is it 2? The first time I read the entire passage, go through all the steps, then the second time I read the passage again, go through all the steps the same way with the exception of end of the phase 1 where I spend 30 seconds on writing down what I believe to be the main conclusion for each paragraph?

I don't see how E is MSS supported. Can someone evaluate my reasoning?

Here was my diagram:

Opera singers with demanding roles at young age MOST lose voice early because they lack maturity/power.

Young singer with great vocal power MOST LIKELY ruin their voice

Young singer MOST lack technical training needed to avoid straining vocal chords-------->Truncated singing career.

What I was looking for: I didn't think any of the existential quantifier statements linked up (which I thought was weird), except the last one. The first statement talks about opera singers, then we go to young singers with great power (we don't know if they are opera singers), and then we go to young singers in general (we don't know if they are opera singers nor if they have great power). Thus, I was expecting an answer choice that just said that Most/Some young singers have truncated singing careers.

Answer A: We don't know about anyone lacking great vocal power.

Answer B: This is what I chose, but under the timed conditions, I rushed through it. Ruining a voice is only linked to young singers. We don't know if the young singers are opera singers.

Answer C: Only? The only necessary condition is truncated singing career. This answer choice doesn't mention this.

Answer D: Same as C. Maturity isn't a necessary condition anywhere.

Answer E: This is supposed to be the correct answer, but how? Straining vocal chords is a MOST relationship between young singers. The young singers may or may not be opera singers! What if there are 100 young singers and 51 strain their voice. But let's say that 49 other opera singers don't strain their voice! The only thing from the stimulus that we can conclude is that most young opera singers lose their voice early since they lack maturity/power. Where does the idea of "straining" link these ideas? To me, this answer has zero support.

Correct me if I am wrong in my explanation.

*The kind of question this is:* Weakening

*Paraphrased question:*

Premises: One of the advantages of B.t. Toxins (BTTs) over Chemical insecticides (CI) results from specificity for pest insects. The BTTs have no detrimental effects on mammals or birds + limited range of activity of the BTTs toward insects means that often a particular BTT will kill pest species but not affect insects that prey upon the species.

Conclusion: This advantage makes BTTs preferable to chemical insecticides for use as components of insects pest management programs.

*What I am looking for:* Something that I didn't know about CIs that make them a better choice, or BTTs that make them a bad choice.

*Answer A:* No, This looks like it strengthens the argument by stating how CIs cause harm to a greater number of insect species than does BTTs. We don’t want to cause the ecosystem to collapse. That might kill off the balance of insects that are non-threatening.

*Answer B:* No, We only care about a particular pest insect and not if BTTs are effective on other insects.

*Answer C:* No. we are not concerned with weeds, and are concerned with only pest insects. Plus, this could strengthen the argument because BTT also doesn’t do damage to weeds, which means it another good thing BTT does.

*Answer D:* Yes, Insects (which includes pest insects) build resistance more readily to BTTs than to CIs.

*Answer E:* No, who cares birds and rodents often do greater damage to farm crops than do insects. This passage is only concerned with pest insects, so lets not let the LSAT writers trick us by adding things that are not in the passage.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-28-section-1-question-05/

Correct me if I am wrong in my explanation.

The kind of question this is: Weakening

Paraphrased question:

Premises: In North Atlantic, Codfish population declined as population of Harp seals increased from two mil to three mil, so there is blame on the seal for Codfish decline, but Cod plays a negligible role in Seal’s diet.

Conclusion: Therefore, it is unlikely seals are responsible for the decline of codfish.

What I am looking for: Something I didn’t know about the correlation between Cod decrease and seal increase. (broad lol).

Answer A: No, this doesn’t weaken the argument. It’s not about how people are inconvenienced about fish because of the seals, its about Cods and Seals.

Answer B: No, but sure, there could be a threat. But, there is no information saying that Codfish are dying from this so-called threat. And, what kind of threat is it anyways?

Answer C: No. Sure they capable enough to thrive in water that cod can’t swim in, but that doesn’t mean they can only live in that type of water. They can swim to warmer water to catch cod if they wanted to.

Answer D: Yes, because if Cod feed almost exclusively on capelin, which is a staple diet for seals, then they must run into each other a lot underwater. Or maybe where you find capelin, you will find Cods, and Cods happen to get eaten too.

Answer E: No, that strengthens the argument because it suggests that the seals have nothing to do with the cod decrease.

Correct me if I am wrong in my explanation. Got this question wrong and choose A because I could find any answer I was happy with.

*The kind of question this is:* Weaken

*Paraphrased question:*

First legislator:

Premises: Medical Research is predominantly done on groups of only men. For example, the effects of coffee drinking on health are evaluated on only men, and studies are lacking on hormone treatments for older women.

Conclusion: Government sponsored medical research should be required to include studies of women.

Second Legislator:

Considerations of male/female balance are inappropriate with respect to research; they have no place in science.

*What I am looking for:* An answer that would attack the reasoning? (I got this question wrong and choose A.)

*Answer A:* No. That is information, but doesn’t effect the second legislator’s argument.

*Answer B:* No. Serving as a subject doesn’t address whether male or female groups will be created, nor does it address the second legislator’s conclusion, let along weaken it.

*Answer C:* No. This is information that does not talk about the issue of male over female patient groups.

*Answer D:* No, this is talking about the training of male and female scientists, and not them as group of patients. This is not helpful.

*Answer E:* Yes, if there were to be restrictions on males, this date base would result in inadequate science. Same case for females.

Sequence Games With A Twist

I Am Pretty Good At Making Inferences When I See Rules That I Am Accustomed To. However, Just About Every Game Introduces A New Concept That I Am Totally Oblivious To. Therefore, I Am Worried That When I Am Ready To Take The LSAT, Many Games Will Have Concepts I Have Never Seen Before.

Is It Safe To Say That Once I Make It Through All Of The Sequence Games With A Twist That I Have Seen Just About All Of The Tricks Of The Trade??? This Way I Can Be Prepared?????

PLEASE RESPOND.

I'm stumped on 18. I set my diagram up to have my shelves numbered horizontically and JY sets his up vertically. I got all of the other questions right but I just couldn't figure out 18. Can it just be a coincidence that I got the other questions right and my diagram is just wrong for this passage? Or, am I just missing something in the way that I set up my diagram? My diagram is ok? I'm not getting "w" must be on the 3rd shelf with my diagram.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-28-section-1-question-05/

Could someone kindly explain the reason "D" is the right answer? Thanks.