Discussions

LSAT

New post

210 posts in the last 30 days

Hi guys I have been doing WAJ for the past couple of weeks. The way I did it was firstly copy&paste screenshot into my ipad notebook and then write explanations on it. Then I switched to make a drill of every question I missed or had doubt with and download that as a pdf. to write notes on. While I found this process to be smooth, I would rarely go back to these individual pdfs because the amount is getting big.

I wonder if I could somehow find a way to incorporate these notes into one document? I am thinking about perhaps doing an excel, but because I would like the stimulus included, I don't wanna do any extra, unnecessary work by somehow copy&pasting or screenshooting into excel; I already don't have enough time to actually practice because I have been spending so much time on BRing and reviewing wrong questions.

Thanks!

0

Hello!

My name is Christo and I am wondering if there is anyone that would be willing to provide any tips on the Digital LSAT. I will be taking the test in November and am concerned about logistics for the testing day. Any help would be greatly appreciated!

From,

Christo

0

In another discussion post about this question (the only other post about this question), one of the responses stated:

the crux of the argument lies in the second part of the second sentence where the author makes an explicit attempt at underlining the underlying logic: "but the absence of sightings cannot prove that it does not (exist)".

In lawgic that's: if there's absence, then we cannot prove non-existence.

Absence --> /prove

In order to weaken the argument, we need to find something that's loosely along the lines of: if there's absence, then that might actually mean non-existence.

(E) encapsulates this best.

But his underlying logic doesn't really make sense to me. If Absence of sightings -> cannot prove yeti does not exist, then the contrapositive is: prove yeti does not exist -> some sightings. The contrapositive doesn't make intuitive sense. If we prove that the yeti does not exist, then there must be some sightings of the yeti? That sounds like the complete opposite of what is necessary to prove something does not exist.

How does answer choice E weaken the argument? Is focusing on the underlying logic in the final sentence the best way to approach this question?

0

No specifics about the test, just a general question regarding experimental sections. Are experimental sections used multiple times in different years? For example, if a section was included in an administration last year or 2 years ago etc., would its inclusion in a current administration mean it was experimental previously but is now the graded section OR would it be experimental again?

0

Hi all -

I started my course of study focusing pretty much exclusively on LGs (my first PT was a 159, -4 RC, -13 LG, -avg 5.5 on LR, so the what needed improving seemed clear) and am now in a place where I'm pretty happy with them.

The problem is now LR. On average I'm still -3 or -4 per section, and I just can't seem to crack the most difficult questions. Get them wrong ~50% of the time on BR, get them wrong in the little bit of time I have to check my answers in section.

So - any tips or strategies for approaching difficult (4 or 5 pip) LRs? Thanks in advance!

0

Has anyone taken the May LSAT-Flex on a Surface Go tablet/ laptop. I just want to see how your experience was. I am a bit anxious as when I test my camera on the proctor U site, the camera freezes a bit. I want to know if this is normal or if I should think of using a different laptop.

Thanks in advance for your feedback.

0

This question was doozy. I wanted to share with others my notes on how I got the correct answer during Blind Review. During the timed test, I would most likely skip this one and save it for later. It took some time for me to translate the stimuli into a format that made sense to me.

At first, I also thought that the sentence in question was the conclusion of the argument. I had to ask myself what the author was really trying to convince me of; that it is not necessary to be at home to be in your house? No. The author was trying to convince me "You can be in your backyard and not at home, that is, not in your house."

So, my notes to decipher it and arrive at the correct answer looked like this:

Difficult argument structure. I think it is C because if we rewrote the stimuli into easier language to read and understand it would look like:

Conclusion: You can be at home if you are in your backyard but not in your house.

Premise: For example, you can also be in your house but not at home if you rent your house to others. (If you're the landlord you could be in the house to do repair work, but you are not 'at home' because you don't live there)

Premise 2/Subconclusion: Therefore it is not sufficient to be in your house to be at home.

Translation of answer choice C: Claim is compatible with the truth or falsity of the conclusion = This is a premise/sub conclusion

0

I chose (E) as my answer because "Selfish individualism" which was suggested as a menace to the integrity of society is not necessarily equivalent to the concept of selfishness, a fundamental motivator of human actions throughout the history (at least in this passage). There is a missing link which remains unexplained to bridge the gap between these two. I thought it was a snake-oil seller tactic switching terms in the vicinity with no proper justification. (A) is improper as there would have been no reason to defy the relevance of that argument in this passage iff he/she had offered us a coherent concept of excessive self-interest. Instead of reducing one of the social ills that epitomized the decade to "Selfish individualism", the author could have said "selfishness". Then, the whole passage can adhere to one particular theme with congruity. (B) is not germane to the argument because no numeric data is demanded whose absence can dismantle the validity of the argument entirely. It could undermine or weaken its cogency at best. (C) is the opposite of the argument. The writer perceives it as a chronic condition ailing our humanity from Day one. (D) is a nut job since we do not need to look into the case of other species to beef up the case against our unconditional/uncalculating benevolence. If humans are born to be driven by their own lust and lucre as part of basic instincts, then any author should channel all of one's efforts to cull out instances related to that hypothesis. The rest would be a dog-and-pony show. Thus, I opted for (E) as my final answer choice. According to the first half of the passage, the innate desire of humans to reveal their true blood even at the cost of damaging others was a culprit putting our society's harmony in jeopardy in the 1980s. Then, the second half of it has a different selling pitch: selfishness in the human history. This ever-lasting character lets him/her question the nature of good will by mankind in general. What I failed to see was the connection between them. What do you think about this? Do you mind sharing the rationale behind ur decision?

0

Hi,

Can anyone help explain why the answer here is E instead of C? I understand why A,B, and D are wrong, but I just don't understand why C is wrong. I felt the main idea of the passage was that we need to reform the way we rehabilitate child criminals, which seemed to me to be a form of cooperation between criminologists and law enforcement (since creating such policy would be a form of law enforcement finally acting on the criminologists' findings).

Any #help would be appreciated!

Thanks!

0

I was self-doubting after the test and had to distract myself. I've read somewhere that not only the "curve" is pre-calculated based on previous experimental sections, test-takers are actually compared with others in their score band, because a question that is "very difficult (5/5)" for sub-160 test-takers might be an "average(3/5)" for 170 test-takers.

I'm making an inference on this. Under extreme circumstance, if one section is SOO difficult that only genius (1%) of the population can perform well. Then would it result in a curve that looks like this?

170: -10

160: -40

Sorry this has nothing to do with actual test, just food for thought out of curiosity.

Also, flowers for all who sit for September test. 🌸🌼

And some kittens/doggies. 🐱🐕

0

I understand in-person study groups may not be recommended by 7sage for different reasons.

In my humble opinion there is nothing like in-person college-like cramming where different people may come together and assist in what others find difficult to comprehend & vice-versa.

I was wondering if there are any in-person study groups near SouthbBay area in a public, quiet place (I.E. a Library's study room). If not, would there be people willing to participate in one?Alternatively a Zoom Group would be good enough. LMK!

I have created a survey to get something concrete going on person or through ZOOM, as I've not been contacted by authors of other discussions. Feel Free to Complete Interested, since I haven't been contacted -I've done a survey for those interested. If so feel free to complete so that there's something concrete going. https://forms.gle/kZLjU8VVny6Nrv4w7

0

After having took 5 practice tests and done probably 50 different logic games, I have come across my number 1 enemy: drawing the initial board. Not even figuring inferences, but simply figuring out if it’s sequence or grouping and drawing a board accordingly. Does anyone have any tips for figuring out the kind of board to draw?

0

Hi Sages,

I have a doubt regarding the order in which we should drill reading comprehension passages. Should we segregate easy, medium,hard passages from PT 1-35 ? Then first drill all the easy passages then move on to the medium level passages then finally take up hard passages ?What can be pros and cons of such a order? Pls advice. Thanks.

0

Hi! I'm currently reliably able to get Strengthening and Weakening questions correct when they are marked as Easiest/Easier/Medium level questions, but I seem to be only getting half of any given set of Harder/Hardest level Strengthening and Weakening questions. I also have the same problem with Flaw questions with about the same ratio of accuracy for the same difficulty levels.

Is there any different strategy I can adopt for sake of improvement? I really think nailing these types of questions in particular along with Flaw questions seems to be the key for me to getting a -3 or less on LR from my current score analytics, and from there my chances at a 170+ would greatly improve.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

0

Confirm action

Are you sure?