I have no idea how the answer is E. I am not connecting anything here. Can someone please explain.

I take my LSAT next week, and I am in the low 160s at the moment. The literal only things on logical reasoning that is keeping me down are the conditional and causal reasoning questions. Are there any specific lessons from the syllabus that anyone found really, really helped with these? I know I could just rewatch all of them but due to my limited time I want to make sure I'm really prioritizing what matters here. Thanks! Good luck everyone

I'm a slow reader and it's very frustrating because when I take practice sections on LR and RC, I only get to about 70% of the questions while the rest I guess on. If I don't time myself, I get most of the questions right and I obviously am able to get to all of them. What do I do? SOS.

Hey, hope this is the right place for this to go. I had a search of the forum and didn't see this question discussed before, so thought I'd throw out my 2 cents.

Doing some drills before this week's test I noticed a much faster way of getting to the right answer choice on Question 1 of Game 1 in this PT, compared to the video explanation. In the video JY skips Q1 because by the end of G1 you have more points of reference with which to brute force it. But I think it's perfectly do-able with just the rules, and I think it's a fast inference.

I set the game up the same as JY, except instead of representing his rule 1 with two crossed out and stacked boxes of BB (boy, boy) and GG (girl, girl), I just used the notation 1+ ---> BG. I think this notation helped me more quickly spot the inference I'm about to explain here.

So from the initial setup and from the first indented prompt we know that the game is going to have 3 lockers with one person in, and 2 lockers with two people in.

Combine this rule with JY's (or my) rule 1 and we then know that there is going to be two lockers with BG in there.

For the next two rules (rules 2 and 3) I used the exact same notation as JY.

As JY explains, from rule 2 and 3 we know J will have to share with N or T, since R must be alone. This allows for a further, vey simple inference which I didn't see JY make with respect to Q1.

We know we have two shared lockers with 1B and 1G in there, and we know that one of those two shared lockers is J and N/T. Since we know that the other shared locker has to have 1B and 1G in it, we then know that the other shared locker is going to have a girl in it. But there's only three girls. And one of them is going with J, and the other is always on her own (R). So the girl that goes in the other shared locker is just the one left over from our choice in the J, N/T locker. (T/N)

Thus, just from this basic inference from the setup and rules 2 and 3 we know at the very least that in the two shared lockers we will have J and N/T and, in the other, T/N. This allows us to completely solve question 1.

All we need to do is look for an answer choice that has J, N and T in it. Since only one answer choice has all these three in it, we know E is right straight away. If there was another answer choice that was, say, J N T and F, then we would have to check to see if F needs to share. But luckily there isn't, so you can answer it right away.

Hope this makes sense!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-31-section-1-game-1/

I know for most logic games we should chain conditionals, but JY did not chain conditionals together on the CD game. Does this mean that there are times when we should not chain conditionals? Thanks.

Does anyone else who was granted a retake for the January FLEX know when the scores will be released?

Has anyone had stop clock breaks? Is there a limit?

Hello,

I am in the foundations section and new to studying for the LSAT and I was wondering whether it is important to have indicators memorized. For example, indicators for concessions (context), premise indicators, conclusion indicators, and etc. Thanks :).

Hi guys, does anyone know If I should do day to day plan that I set up, or I should keep going? Honestly lessons are short, and I want to practice regarding what I have learned, but I get stuck in LSAT questions?

Anyone here that is into modern board games have any that would help with LGs? TY!

Is there a method for identifying the ASQ in each Logic Game question set?

If anyone who has taken/will be taking the LSAT has any specific tips that they would be willing to share specifically on the Analytical Reasoning (logic games) section that would much appreciated.

Hi Everyone,

These questions are some of the most time consuming in LR, and there are many people in the LSAT community who advocate using certain techniques for eliminating answer choices on these questions quickly. These techniques include strategies like: matching the strength of the conclusion (qualifier words), the type of reasoning (conditional, causation, etc.), and other qualifier words such as most, some, all, etc.

However, I've noticed that in recent exams (70's), LSAC has made these questions (even!) more difficult and time consuming by including all of these features in most of the answer choices. (For example, if the stimulus uses "probably" in the conclusion, 4 out of 5 answer choices will all include the word "probably" too.) As a result, they've eliminated some of the 'quick and easy' tells that we had at our disposal to move through these questions faster.

Has anyone else noticed this trend? If so, what other techniques/shortcuts do you use in order to cut through the problem and eliminate wrong answers quickly?

Thanks!

I am working on the LG section of the CC. I am fool proofing all of the games as I go through them, examples and timed sections. How much time should I plan to give between runs on a particular game? After writing a game out 3-4 times (twice a day), I am able to get it down quickly, but I also feel like I am just memorizing. Is there a particular set of games that we are supposed to full proof or just do them as we go? I am also planning on testing in August, so I have about 3 months to work with.

Hi,

this was a weird LR question that I thought somebody might have some insight on. I used Process of Elimination to find that E was the only possible right answer, but I was not completely sure how E was the right answer when it stated that the Student's criteria was "inconsistent" with "the principle the historian advanced".

For something to be inconsistent with something else, they must contradict each other. The principle the Historian brings up is that "Alexander the Great should not be judged by appeal to current notions of justice". However, the student only stated that, in order to tell if Alexander the Great raised contemporary standards, one would need to "invoke standards other than those of his own culture". This criteria does not HAVE to contradict the principle the Historian brings up because "standards other than those of his own culture" might or might not include "current notions of justice".

Can anybody explain how E is right here?

Any #help would be appreciated!

Should I be BRing logic games? Or should I do the game timed, check answers and if necessary, foolproof?

I am struggling with the end of LR sections and wanted to mimic the end of an LR section in my drills with 5 difficult questions. My plan in my drills is to include 1 parallel flaw, 1 weakening, 1 MBT, 1 SA/NA, and 1 Flaw as these are the types of questions that I usually encounter at the end of an LR section. Is there a better way of going about it? Are these questions actually more common or is it just random?

Does anyone know why either E is wrong for question 21, or why D is right for question 24?

Can anyone help me out with this one? I ended up getting it right by process of elimination but I'm having trouble figuring out how to write it in conditional logic.

Thanks!

Hi guys I would appreciate it if someone could review my reasoning for this question and let me know if this is correct. When BRing I realized that I made a mistake and chose A rather than E which is correct.

Basically if negated, A says something along the lines of less than 51% of those people who abandon the use of chemical fertilizers will periodically grow alfalfa. Now this may be tempting but it doesn`t really do much, our argument doesn`t say that every person needs to make this switch, just that in order to improve the soil structure we need to ditch chemical fertilizers and begin growing green manure crops.

E is a much better answer because it tells us that we can`t use chemical fertilizers AND grown green manure crops, so we have to ditch chemical fertilizers as stated in the argument

When negated it sounds somewhat like, some farmers in the region will grow green manure even if they do not abandon the use of chemical fertilizers, suggesting that we do not need to ditch the fertilizers in order to grow green manure, and ruining our argument.

I also struggled a little with answer choice D, but here`s my reasoning

I think its incorrect because when negated it just says chemical fertilizers themselves do not have a destructive effect on soil, this can be true because the argument is assuming that its the switch from green manure to chemicals that has deteriorated the soil structure, it doesn`t need to be that the chemicals themselves are destructive.

Let me know what you think!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-73-section-2-question-20/

Hey guys im reaching out to anyone that can offer me some advice. I do pretty well untimed and timed I do horribly. I took the June LSAT and scored a 150 and my target is a 168+ Ive been studying since August, and I am signed up for the November exam but I took another practice test and I am still around the same area, Idk why when its times all my organized thought goes out the window I have raging anxiety and I cant think straight and stumble on works. It like the episode of spongebob with all the mini spongebob running around like crazy. Basically it is just extremely hard for me, I have gotten significantly better at Logical reasong although more improvement will help as well as continuously foolproofing LG. My biggest struggle is 100% Reading comprehension I mean like bad I don't know what it is. Anyway I am applying for Fall 2020 cycle if I took the January would that be too late, I pretty much have the rest of my application supplements already done, its just this exam I need to get out of the way. Please anyone help me, I feel like a failure and I just don't know what to do.

(Also aiming for a good school not necessarily a T-14, in terms of application cycle and lsat date)

So I have a question on Problem Set questions, particularly the last two ones. Usually I am on a role and get most to all of the questions right in the sample single questions before the problem sets. Those sample single questions seem to be also numbered at the harder ranges like 10-25 ish. However when it comes ot the problem sets, especially the ones with 5 stars, they seem to be exponentially harder than any of the sample questions before the sets. For an example: in the Necessary Assumption section, I was pretty much able to get most of the questions right in the single questions. Not only that, the questions I got wrong consisted of a minor misreading of the passsage or answer choice. And don't forget that these questions are also in the 10-25 range which I believed would have helped me with the 5 star questions. It turns out that I was wrong. The difficulty in figuring out the correct answer choices even after significant amount of times has been evident. A question 13 from a 5 star question in a problem set seem to be exponentially harder than a question 13 from any of the sample single questions before the problem sets. I have been wondering, where does getting the 5 star questions right rougly place you in the LSAT score ranges compared to 4 star or 3 star?

The best advice is to wait until you are "ready" to take the test! The greatest gift is to take the test and achieve your score!

For some of us, that didn’t happen on our first take.

What happens if after taking the test and the experience leaves you stressed thinking you weren’t ready?

Before you get your score, please consider doing a thorough post-take written analysis of your experience. As recommended to me by the Sages in my attempts to match my PT scores to Actual test scores, I have seen significant improvement by following their advice:)

There are 2 aspects post-take that are paramount to gain from the experience…

-How did I procedurally take the test?

o Was my pre-test routine sufficient to provide the best testing experience?

o Was my timing strategy on point - Did I skip difficult LR questions, RC passages & LG games efficiently?

o Did I let a rough patch undermine my confidence in my ability?

What were my weaknesses that caused me to lose confidence?

o What LR questions, RC passages, LG games cost me time or points?

o Did I try a new strategy too close to test date that I hadn’t made instinctual - to think more about the strategy than what the test presented?

o How did I handle questions that are my known weakness and what can I do to drill them to remove that insecurity?

I learned so much from my previous takes! The first take is a blur - I had no clue what I was doing even with all of my prep to take it when I was ready. My 2nd & 3rd takes were exciting because I saw the differences in my understanding not just on certain specific aspects of the test but on a global understanding of how to conquer the test.

Hope you feel the same way I do with no regrets about being "Ready"... If you achieve your score, then LS application focus! If you under-preformed, then you have a game plan.

If a retake is on your horizon, hope this helps :)

All the best on your scores!!

Thanks!

Listen and subscribe:

Apple Podcasts | Spotify

In this episode, Alex sits down with 7Sage LSAT tutor Nathalie to unpack the story behind her 174, from early struggles and study breakthroughs to a test day comedy of errors from hell. Hear how she navigated setbacks, refined her reasoning skills, and ultimately turned one of the most stressful test experiences imaginable into a success story.