Is there a summary of all of the different question types for LR that briefly explains the strategy for handling each of them? I am not opposed to putting one together myself, but if there is already one available, well then that saves me some time!! Thank you.

I know ppl watch JY's video explanations for all LG.

Do ppl similarly watch all of JY's RC video explanations?

Any reasons why/or why not to -- would be appreciated as well as any other general advice/comments/suggestions/wisdom. thanks!

Whats up

Admin. note: Did you mean to send a direct message instead? Use Discussion > Discussion Inbox to send a direct message.

Free will is not applicable in determining responsibility for all situations (its not a one size fit all equation).

We hold criminals responsible bc they cause damage out of free will.

We do not hold drivers (driving while heart attack and cause damage) responsible, even though the heart attack could be prevented from diet (free will).

A. Itself is not a conclusion

BC. Not “Should”

D. Not true

E. Maybe, saying that we do not apply free will equally to all situations (i.e both criminals and drivers under heart attack both stem from free will but they have different outcome).

I've been really trying to study LG for the Jan LSAT. The problem I'm having is that I understand the rules but I diagram the rules/inferences different then JY, thus I get questions wrong or questions take me forever to do. For example on Preptest 5 Game, I wrote the classes down and distributed the grades. While JY in his video did the opposite. If I use JY's diagram, every question goes by extremely fast. How can I get better at diagramming games that I am seeing for the very first time?

This necessary assumption question discusses the treatment of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) with a newly developed drug. CFS is associated with three different symptoms, and we don’t know if these symptoms are the effects of only one virus or of multiple different ones. Tests of the new drug indicate that this drug lessens the severity of all three CFS symptoms. The stimulus takes this to provide evidence to the effect that CFS probably is caused by one single virus, not by multiple different ones.

Pre-phrase / anticipation: We need an assumption to the effect of ‘If a single treatment lessens all of a given syndrome’s symptoms, then it is more likely for this syndrome to be caused by a single virus than by multiple ones.’

The pertinent answer choices are (B) and (D). (B) states: “It is more likely that the new drug counteracts one virus than that it counteracts several viruses.” This matches the consequent in the anticipated assumption but leaves out its antecedent. (B) thus does not make the argument valid and would fall short of being a sufficient assumption. But is (B) necessary? If negated, (B) would indicate that it would be equally likely or even more likely that the new drug affected several viruses. This is not at all what the author is trying to argue and thus would seem to rob their conclusion of any support.

(D) states: “Most syndromes that are characterized by related symptoms are each caused by a single viral infection.” This in itself might be right, and arguably (D) would be a good strengthen answer choice. (D) gets at the conclusion and points out parallel cases where similar correlations have been observed as well. A number of things seem off though: (1) Do we know that the alleviated symptoms in fact are ‘related,’ as this answer choice suggests? We certainly know that they all are effects of one or more causes, but does that also render these effects related to one another? (2) The conclusion in the stimulus takes the results of the experiments with the new drug to provide evidence to the effect that CFS has a single cause, but (D) does not contain a connection to these experiments. Instead, (D) is just making a general claim that arguably strengthens the conclusion in isolation but that does not also connect it to the other parts of the argument.

As an NA answer choice, (B) thus seems better than (D). (B) is essentially saying: In probabilistic terms, the new drug’s acting on three different effects indicates that these three effects likely have a single cause rather than three different ones. By contrast, had the drug only affected two of CFS’s three symptoms, it would have been likely that there are at least two causes for CFS, one virus that triggers two of its symptoms and another virus that triggers the third one. (B) is thus hinting at a sort of appeal to simplicity behind the author's reasoning. The author seems to assume: If two different hypotheses about the causal relationships behind a given correlation are possible, the simpler hypothesis is more likely correct.

I would love someone to help me with the understanding the underlying flaw. I have seen this stimulus type, and it seems very cookie cutter for me. In my understanding, the argument's flawed reasoning is that the argument assumes that 1. warmer air increases humidity, and 2. that the only thing that can cause an increase in rainfall is an increase in temperature of warm air. However, I am seeing some other patterns, it goes from a probable modality (using tends to be humid) to a highly likely modality (in the conclusion).

Admin note: added link

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-50-section-2-question-17/

Hi,

I am confused that is "not" itself a 4th group reasoning indicator or has it to be paired up with both as "Not both" to be a 4th group indicator.

Thank you,

I appreciate your help

Hello!

Could someone please explain why the correct answer would be E. I put B, but I honestly just guessed. I need some help wrapping my head around this question.

Thank you!

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

can someone explain why D is the right answer

Could any 7sage administrator or someone tell e where the difficulty would be onthese four games? Especially games 3 and 4 please?

Seems likely my test center will be closed for this storm on the Gulf Coast, but I haven’t heard anything yet. How much advance is typically given for a test center closing and how would I be contacted? Email?

Could someone please explain why the answer is A not B? Thanks!

Hey everyone, so I just got my January 2023 lsat score back and it's one point lower than my current highest score. I have taken the test 3 times very spread out over the years as I've navigated being a student/working throughout my studying. My highest current score is 156 (June 2021), and on my most recent test, I scored 155 (January 2023). Any advice would be so helpful as I really don't know what to do!! I really wish I had seen more progress over the years as I was practice testing in low-mid 160s prior to my January test. Should I cancel or is one point not worth a cancellation showing up on my record?

I guess the reason why its true is because its strengthening the reason to use sugar on the wound, best explained because of its dehydrating effect. I originally choose E but then switched it to A and got it right in a blind review.

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

(1) Most profitable investment: The rate of inflation EXCEEDS the rate of return by a given percentage (say, x%). That is, in real terms, the investment generates a loss; the inflation rate overcompensates whatever profit is being made here. According to the stimulus, this means that the VALUE of this investment declines by the same percentage (x%) at least. Value thus is presented as a function of profit.

(2) Any other investment – that is, any investment that is LESS profitable than the one described in case #1: The value of this investment declines by MORE than x% – that is, the differential between the inflation rate and the rate of return must be even greater than in case #1. Inflation overcompensates the rate of returns even more than in the first case.

Answer choice (C) suggests: The second investment (any investment that is not the most profitable one) is LESS profitable than the most profitable one. If VALUE is a function of PROFIT, and if VALUE in the second case declines more than in the first case, then the second case cannot describe the maximally profitable investment described in case #1.

I’m not sure I’m getting either the economics or the logic behind this right, but it seems to me that a lot of the information presented in the passage is redundant. To conclude what answer choice (C) says ("Case #2 does not describe the most profitable investment"), we only would have needed to know (1) that case #1 is the most profitable investment, and (2) that case #2 can be distinguished from that investment. Is this right / is there a more efficient way to solve this, especially under timed conditions?

Many test companies advocate an active reading approach to RC. I think it's helpful. However, under timed conditions, it's generally difficult to juggle all the info packed into a RC passage. There's not much time to re-read the passage. So, you have to be able to "follow the logic" of the passage in one reading, then attack the questions. I have found this approach very helpful, and very time efficient.

Why is it that for MBT questions we do not try all scenarios before picking an AC? For example, question 3 reads, “If K sits directly between L & P, then M must sit between..” for this in the live commentary, she writes PKL but doesn’t try for LKP. I understand that both scenarios lead to the same AC. However, shouldn’t we try all scenarios before selecting an AC? A MBT AC should apply to all scenarios, not just one. Just trying to figure out what’s best practice. #help

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

I had mapped it as:

/RDW - /Alleviate

- IEI -> RTV

w/ the contra, i sort of see why B is correct:

[ Nat. Responsibility -> /RTV -> /IEI -> RDW ]

Does that make sense?

But why wouldn't E be correct? Is it that the idea of alleviating conditions of injustice are not the same thing as creating conditions of economic justice?

I can't parse out or understand the assumption being made in this question below:

Paleontologist: It is widely, but falsely, held that life began in the ocean and did not exist on land until half a billion years ago.

The answer is D but I do not understand why

Admin Note: Deleted the question and answer choices because it is against our Forum Rules to post the entire question and answer choices on the forum.

#help why is E the correct answer? I am confused because there seems to be nothing in the stimulus that alludes to E being correct, and it seems as if one would have to have prior knowledge of mussels/their chemical transformation abilities to know this. I do not necessarily think any of the other choices or very strong, but this choice E seemed very random to me. I'd appreciate any insight of what I'm missing!

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

Hi all I find I have some difficulty on numbers related LR questions, there was a MBT question on pt 89 dealing with average numbers of students in night classes and an easier question on pt 80.1.2 (flaw question) where it's a numerator denominator trap.

I remember someone saying "you have to know 2 of 3 things to make a valid inference, you have to know at least 2/3 of the numerator, denominator, or the %." Am I remembering this correctly?

Also does anyone have any tips from figuring these numbers questions out easily? Thanks!

For the October 2019 LSAT, I was put on a waitlist. I know in the past, LSAC was almost always able to get folks off the waitlist and into a test center within a 100 mile radius. But now with the switch to digital, it seems like they might not be able to because they need more tablets vs. just printing more tests like they could do in the past.

I have called LSAC a couple of times and it seems like they are also scrambling and are not able to give any guarantees at this time. Has anyone heard anything?

Hello

Any suggestions? I am able to get my wanted score only in BR.

On June it will be my 4th attempt.

How should I plan my LG fool proof if I am aiming for the October test? Last year I studied for 2 months and stopped. I am redoing the CC again and I just started with the Games section in the CC. After I FP the games that are in the lessons what should my next step be? Should I go for the 1-35 bundle for example. And how many games should I do a day and so on? I would appreciate some advice!!