I got this hopelessly wrong. Only after some quite extensive reviewing, I was able to put the explanation together. Anyone who has done this problem before please review my reasoning and add to it.

#help

PP --> Money

D --> EqualPP

D --> PP --> Money

/money

/D

A - I didn't see any conjunctions in the stimulus

B -

Bookstore --> money

LoveBooks

BooksExpensive

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

/money

C -

Hist-Fic --> accuracy

Sci-Fic --> /accuracy

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

Hist-Scifi --> Difficult

D - Sometimes and difficult to predict, can eliminate this

E -

GoodHealth --> Exercise

Exercise --> AdequateTime

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

GoodHealth --> Exercise --> AdequateTime

/Adequatetime

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

/Goodhealth

This parallels.

Hello everyone!!

I am back offering LG assistance. DM if interested

What's up 7sage fam. I am getting my ass handed to me by RC. I meet with a tutor every week, and when we meet and go through problems together everything seems so clear and easy. The second I get by myself, it is like a bomb goes off in my head and I will consistently put up -6 or worse. Any tips that anyone could share would be great. I would take any help I can get right now.

Beans.

(via Trainer)

Find assumption to make legit:

Kermit is a frog. Therefore, he love green long time.

Right: One is a frog only if one loves green. Translation: In order to be a frog one must love salsa verde.

Wrong: One loves green only if one is a frog. Translation: All the salsa verde lovers, are frogs. (but not all the frogs love verde salsa)

I'm struggling with translating the "wrong" statement. It just don't make no sense ricky bobby, and the worst part is it did two days ago. When I don't intentionally think about for like 2 minutes, it seems like the right and wrong statement are saying the same thing.

I know that "if" statements read left to right and "only if" states read right to left (or you just move the if in front of the first clause), but it's hard for me to understand.

This has probably been covered before...but advice is best only if it is fresh. (see what I did there. see it.)

Hi guys,

Here is the gist: I have a scientific background and tend to do well on science passages. I suck at art and humanities passages.

It seems like I can go -0 pretty easily on 1 and 2 star passages, -1 on 3 star passages, and anything between -2 to -4 on 4 and 5 star passages.

Obviously I have difficulty with the hard and hardest passages. I find that I read the stimulus in about 3:30 minutes and usually that is enough to understand 1 to 3 star passages really well to get most of the questions right. Spend the same amount of time on 4 and 5 star passages though, and I get a lot of questions wrong timed. I know that it is because a) I spin my wheels on difficult questions and b) I did not fully understand the passage.

I know what I have to do in order to address a), but for b) it seems to be a case of... I need to do a drill set/intensive on hard reading comp passages. I went ahead and printed all the 4 to 5 star passages from PT 7 to 35. Going to do them timed and blind review. And then put them away/archive them and redo them after some time has passed. What do you think?

Help. I have an ERROR 404 message on everything I do

Third call info:

Take PT 50 and BR on your own before the call.

Submit 2-5 questions you want to review here: https://goo.gl/forms/MEUpRULFRSrHe1Ba2

Note: We will try to limit the calls to under 2 hours. We will review LR questions first and only review RC if we have time.

We will not be reviewing LG.

This step is important: Come prepared to speak through how you approached the question you submitted. If more than one of us had trouble on the same question, we can each have an opportunity to speak through our thought process/which choices we were stuck between. The rest of the group then discusses.

Sign up for Discord and add side braid#1597. Comment on this post if you plan on joining so I can send the link to Discord server and additional info to your inbox.

My goal for this study group is for everyone to both contribute and benefit from each other's success. I want to help you get to that next level and I'm asking for your help to get me there as well.

@tanes256 @meganqliu @mcmlaw36 @Gladiator_2017 @"Kings Never Die" @sillllyxo @cgracia12 @etphonehome @thisissparta @sjiang666 @FiestaNextDoor @sarahmelton6 @leslieh327 @jennybbbbb @nicholasthomas127 @alyssamcc0593 @"Shazia..."

Why can’t we have a class on just conditional chains?

So I do not want to constantly open new discussion threads for logic games, I think it is best to make this just one and if anyone else has their own questions just keep posting here and we can all try to answer each others questions. (Just a suggestion :-) )

Preptest 7, Feb 1993 LSAT Logic Games kicked my butt today ! In particular Logic Game 3, (7 Judges, In & Out Game)

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-7-section-2-game-3/

After reviewing I realized how splitting the game board makes the game so much more easier. But here is where I am still kinda stuck.

Rule 1.) If the two conservatives and at least one liberal voted the same way as each other, then both moderates voted that way.

I initially diagramed this as

If CCL -->MM

IF not MM-> not CCL

But when I saw the video of JY explaining the rules he labeled the contrapositive as

If not CCL -> not MM (little confused why he did it that way, is that not against the arrow?)

hi everyone! During a study plan workshop, ZeSean discussed pairing practice drills with the core cirriculum. Is there an existing guide to match my progress on the core cirriculum to the practice drills and/or the live classes, other than simply guaging by the titles and difficulty levels?

As the October test is fast approaching, I have been focusing on what has now become my weakest section, reading comprehension. I miss at best -9 questions, and usually do not finish within the time restraints or end up overlooking details because I am rushing. I would like to reduce this number to at least -7, preferably -5. Does anyone have any tried and true techniques they use tackle the passages? I tried focusing on three passages, but I have seen very inconsistent results with that method (I did score 21/27 one time, probably lucky!)

Hi everyone,

Now this was a weird parallel flaw question because I feel like there are so many different answer explanations for the answer choices on this question all over the web, and I am not sure which ones are the most reliable. Thus, I felt maybe listing what I thought here would help clarify stuff, and I want to know what people here think (is my reasoning here look correct or not correct?)

What I thought was the flaw: transferring a non-transferrable trait from X to a reproduction of X

A-- right because it matches the flaw (crossed out A during the actual timed test because the trait isn't the same in wording like we see in the stimulus)

B-- wrong because this is a conditional relationship, not an argument

C-- wrong because this is a conditional relationship, not an argument

D-- wrong because we want to see some trait transfer from Jo to Layne, and we don't see that

E-- wrong because being similar is not the same as imitating/reproducing (chose E during my PT because I didn't realize this)

Any feedback would be very much appreciated!

thanks!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-36-section-1-question-21/

https://www.canva.com/design/DAEtBunbgIc/av9yHWZPj4q6_miGTu9FoQ/view?utm_content=DAEtBunbgIc&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link&utm_source=publishsharelink

Please let me know any advice for improvement!

I am looking for a possible group or single study buddy in the Houston Area within the 610 loop .

I am open to an online group as well if that would help .

Can someone help me to check if my analysis is right?

Premise:

Two group of fish: one traditionally raised with dull routine and the experimental hatcheries raised in stimulating routine

The experimental hatcheries was bolder to explore new environment and try new food.

Conclusion:

Experimental Fish are more likely to survive.

Choice

Some fish raised in traditional hatcheries die because they are too timid in their foraging for food.

Firstly, this must be true because the whole point of the augment was the difference between traditional and the experimental fish. We have to argue that the traditional group doesn't have that unique quality of the experimental fish.

Secondly, if we apply the negation test: none fish raised in traditional are too timed foraging for food, the argument falls apart.

Thank youuuuu!

Admin note: edited title

How should I be reviewing logical reasoning questions? I find that just reading the explanation doesn’t seem to help me much? I also go over the questions I am not sure about by reading forums but it hasn’t worked out well

How should I prepare for the lsat? I need some kind of in person interaction, but do not have the funds for private tutoring. I know this is 7sage’s forum, but are there specific courses people could recommend? I tried blueprint and it didn’t work out

Any tips to improve reading comp??

LR I'm averaging 40/50, LG 20/25, but my Reading Comp is around 12/25 which is really lowering my overall score.

Glad I saw this game with the outlier game types cropping up on current tests! Went in with way to cookie cutter of a diagram on the front end. Incredibly thankful for being able to adapt even tho it wasn't as quick as I would have preferred.

(kind of reminded me of assumptions I made on the multi-tiered car dealership game)

Hello, 7Sage team & fellow 7Sagers.

I have been utilizing the RC passage explanations and have been wondering what I am supposed to get out of them. It seems the level of detail you all go into is well beyond the level of detail we should be absorbing during our read through under time pressure.

In the lessons, we were given a somewhat different sort of break down where low res. summaries and predictions of the following paragraph content were discussed. I found this very helpful as a check on how I broke down the passage and utilized this analysis to answer the questions.

I realize that there is a passage summary underneath the video explanation, but again I am just confused on how these video explanations aid in our RC abilities.

I apologize if their usefulness is obvious to everyone else. I just felt the need to express my thoughts in a manner in which I could receive some feedback.

Thank you.

Anyone have a comprehensive list which they use to review/drill which question type is an argument we must look for vs not an argument...etc

Please message me for more info if you'd like to join and you've not already received the info in your inbox. :)

If there's a 5/5 difficulty question that I get correct on my first try, should I make an effort to go over and identify/rule out the trap answers? I guess in a way I must have done that in my original answering. I worry that going over them more might make me more confused when my intuition/reasoning was right the first time. Thoughts? Is it worth doing to carry over?

For those of you who were waiting to take it here. Just stumbled upon it going through problem sets... no explanations yet, but at least it can be added to your analytics now.

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/preptests/

Wondering if anybody on here has just taken the Sept 2017 LSAT in Australia? It is different from the US version and hoping to gain any insight into the experimental sections/any general thoughts you had !

I had 3 LR so i know that my LG and RC were real.

From what i can remember:

LG1: One layer sequencing game

Had a Condition that M-W.

R either first or 6th

LG2: Something with artefacts

LG3:[completely skipped as pressed for time]

LG4: Double layer sequencing game

Buildings being erected either Upper or Lower (Buildings FGHI)

RC:

-reading about kente woven fabric

-reading about whether chemistry and physics are linked

-reading about law systems in UK and technology

Any info about how many questions were in each of your LRs would be super helpful!

Thanks :))))

Listen and subscribe:

Apple Podcasts | Spotify

Join Rahela and Eric for a Thanksgiving-themed conversation about the five LSAT strategies that made the biggest difference in their prep. They break down how to navigate bad study days, develop patience and resilience, get real value from wrong answer journals, rely on study buddies, and change your approach when you hit a plateau.

If you are looking to reboot your studying or understand what actually moves the needle, this episode is for you.