According to the stimulus, the club president has disallowed Jeffrey to vote. Thomas is arguing that that was in violation of club rules.

(Structure)

Premise 1: Rule: Vote --> Good standing member

Premise 2: Jeffrey is a good standing member

Conclusion: The president’s action of disallowing Jeffrey to vote was in violation of club rules.

Here are club rules: only good standing members may vote. (vote—> good standing member)

Jeffrey paid his dues on time and therefore he is a good standing member. Necessary condition is satisfied, therefore we don’t know if he is allowed to vote or not allowed to vote. There could be other criteria to qualify to vote that Jeffrey does not meet, in which case he is not allowed to vote. Or Jeffrey meets all the criteria to vote, in which case he is allowed to vote. We have no information about it.

But, Thomas concludes that the president’s action of disallowing Jeffrey to vote was in violation of club rules. Disallowing Jeff's vote could or could not be in violation of the rules. In spite of this possibility that it may not be in violation, Thomas made a determination that it is in violation. This is the flaw. He is saying that allowing him to vote is in compliance with (authorized by) the rule. (In other words, to be in compliance, Jeffrey should be allowed to vote.)

And that is what answer choice (A) is saying. His argument fails to take into account the distinction between something not being prohibited (allowing Jeffrey to vote) and its being authorized (in compliance with the rule). He is saying that allowing to vote is in compliance with (authorized by) the rule. At the end of the answer choice A, words “by the rule” is omitted. “Authorized” here does not mean his being authorized to vote, but rather, it means being authorized by the rule.

We can also view it as sufficient condition, necessary condition confusion flaw. Because in reaching the conclusion, Thomas mistakenly assumed the club rule as: good standing member —> vote. But this is not in any of the answer choices.

(A) is the correct answer.

(B) There is no character attack here.

(C) There is no such statement being denied or regarded as true here.

(D) What they were voting about is irrelevant.

(E) Whether Althea is authority in club rules or not is irrelevant.

Answer choice (A) was written very tricky that it was difficult to recognize it was the right answer.

.

Hi,

Can anyone explain why the answer here is B instead of C? I just feel like JY's explanation for why B is right instead of C seems a bit insufficient

Thanks!

If I am taking my first LSAT in August, and have already begun studying the syllabus, how should I incorporate practice drills and PTs to maximize my efficiency? Should I complete the syllabus fully and then complete practice drills and PTs after? Or should I mix in practice drills and PTs within my studying of the syllabus?

If any of you want to discuss whether or not you should cancel your June LSAT, you can book a free 15-minute consultation with members of our admissions team here: https://calendly.com/d/dtn-f57-4n6/should-i-cancel

I am having trouble understanding what the question means when asking what is "IMPLICIT in the authors argument"

I am registered for the June 2024 LSAT. Should I be taking the Legacy mode which has 4 scored sections or the Current mode which has 3 scored sections. I know that the June 2024 LSAT only has 3 scored sections, but the current mode does not seems to have an additional experimental section.

Hey all,

What's really tripping me up is that this question stem is written in the passive voice. The stem saying "could have remained unchanged in force and focus IF which one of the following had been advanced as a counterexample in place of the word 'absentee'" makes me believe that the original explanation wouldn't have to be amended if it weren't for the counter example of "absentee" being used. So I was trying to find a counter example that talked about an individual performing the action unilaterally, while not needing the explanation that resolves the impasse which is what I thought the question stem was asking me to do.

If the question stem was "the reasoning could remain unchanged in force and focus if which one of the following words is used in place of the word 'absentee'" rather than the goddamn passive voice, then it really would be much easier.

Can someone clear up my confusion? Am I just crazy???

Paging JY

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-27-section-4-question-22/

Hello!

Across my last 15 PTs (50s - 80s) I consistently scored -1 to 0 on LG. I consider it by far my best section and can always rely on it to carry my score. However, on both the April and June LSATs, the last game completely destroyed me. I found myself guessing on 3+ problems, which I never do in any of my practice tests. It was not a time issue either; I had plenty of time during both tests yet could barely get past the game board setup stage since the questions felt so different from the PTs.

After the April test I practiced a ton of different games at all difficulties and had really high confidence going into June's test, only to be destroyed by the last game again. How can I prepare for LG for the August LSAT? I feel like I've done a billion games on 7Sage and consistently get -1 to 0 on all of them, yet when I get to the real thing it feels completely foreign.

Which LGs are similar to the April/June 5 star games?

Hi,

I have went through the cc of 7sage a little bit ago, and are moving into the LG section of the cc. However, as many have recommended, I have been trying to incorporate LR drills while going through the LG section of cc. I have been trying to do drills in LR specifically focusing on question types but seem to still be getting a lot wrong even with BR. In addition, I have purchased the Loophole since many said the supplemental material helps a lot. I was just wondering on anyone's recommendations on how to study? (I can dedicate a majority of my time studying since I only work PT as well). (I also have not touched RC at all in cc yet) Should I work through the Loophole before continuing anymore drills on 7sage? Should I still try to go through LR and LG at the same time, or how should I work through both most effectively? Any and all advice much appreciated!!!

[I am posting on behalf of a 7Sage user. Please feel free to leave your comments below. Thank you for your help!]

Hi I just did a logic game in PT9 (S3 G3). I was wondering if you know of another logic game in the practice question bank that is similar to PT9 S3 G3? I would like to practice a similar game type under a different scenario.

I am working through the CC right now, still only in LR. What is your strategy for reviewing information? Everything is comprehensive and I know that I am retaining what I've learned thus far because I apply it in the exercises, but I feel like I couldn't necessarily summarize the information, I just know it mechanically for the most part. Do you guys go back or use other sources? Time is precious as I am taking it in August, I just want to make sure I am not losing information.

This question had me sorta off the rails briefly cuz I was expecting to see a cookie-cutter flaw problem. As if laughing at my assumption, the dilemma posed by it vexed me. I was torn between two competing choices, (B) and (E). In the end, I was convinced that any safety protections like child safety seats demand the observation of rules with rigor should one want to maximize "security benefits from them".If a parental figure fails to install the seat properly, relying on a wrongful belief that the mere existence of it would be a fool-proof/copper-bottomed guarantee or a surefire thingy for "child safety in the vehicle", then he or she could engender more probabilities for putting it in jeopardy. But (B) was such a clickbait and I was almost catfished. The more children are on the road, the more they could be exposed to dangers underway. Thus, I was baffled by the difficulty of this question at the outset. I was wondering whether I am being an outlier here. Of course, every question asks us to find "The Best Answer Choice"by eliminating all the others, however viable and feasible they are. What are ur thoughts on this?

I have one month until my exam and am consistently performing the worst on RC. Usually -7/8. My problem is, I don't know what I'm doing wrong. From everything I have read and what my tutor is telling me, I read the passage correctly and comprehend everything in it, doing a low res summary along the way, ID-ing the MP, and completing an analysis of where the authors voice is. I am doing this in 4 1/2 min too. However when it comes to the questions (particularly ones that ask me to make an inference or decide what the author might agree/disagree with) I struggle a lot and it takes upwards of 5 min. I've noticed that once I go back through and BR (reread the whole passage and do every question again) I usually get -1/0. Not sure if this is because I know what the questions will ask and therefore where to focus in the passage or if I'm less stressed about time or something. I don't know how to improve or even where I'm going wrong. Help !!

Hi all, I started doing timed past tests but can't finish LG sections (LR and RC are fine). Should I come back and finish the leftover LG questions untimed but continue doing the rest timed? How should I go about doing timed prep tests now?

Hey y'all, I'm quite stuck on Q6 re: why E is better than D.

I chose E and cite my reasons as follows:

line 12-13: "the stated legal rationale ... has nevertheless proven be to be problematic."

line 57-61: "the legal rationale... thus failed to target the genuine problem ... "

to clarify, it was not the judicial decision that was controversial but the rationale given. the rationale given blamed judicial enforcement rather than the covenant's content, the latter of which the author believes is the genuine problem. the author offers up a new rationale: the covenant's racially restrictive content is the genuine problem. that is E.

in regards to D, i felt that it was operative in the author's argument to an extent: only in paragraph 3. if the question had read, "...most clearly operative in practice," i would've chosen E. but the main principle operating in the author's argument is that: in upholding a judicial decision, if the given rationale was controversial, a new one should take its place, which is what the author argued for in paragraphs 2, 4, and parts of 3 (1st two sentences).

Admin note: edited title; please use the format of "PT#.S#.Q#(P#) - [brief description of stimulus]"

Admin note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-85-section-1-passage-1-passage/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-85-section-1-passage-1-questions/

Let's make those marginal gains in this marginal game.

Looking for like-minded LSAT loving loonies, preferably already PTing 170+ and can BR 175-180 with a goal of achieving PT-BR convergence and planning to absolutely kill it for the August 2022, maybe beyond.

Intending to discuss and document inferences that break LGs wide open, reading strategies that illuminate the densest RC passages, authoritatively reasoning the most convoluted LR questions, identifying and dodging LSAT writers' most subtle question traps, and making the most of all 2100 precious seconds of an LSAT timed section. Also intend to analyze common patterns of LSAT sections and questions with the intent of being able to identify inferences and predict questions and anticipate answers before even attacking the questions.

Planning on regularly scheduled strategy discussion workshopping, coordinated competitive timed PT takes, and exhaustively thorough and accurate blind review. Goal of at least a few hours of productive LSAT time daily.

DM with your info and availability, maybe a list of some of your untouched PTs. Will determine a workable schedule and setup zoom sessions or a discord server. Let's gooooo.

I have the June LSAT, and I took a PT two days ago and bombed the logic sections. -10 on experimental and -7 on the scored one. I aced the first games, but both times, I encountered some kind of layered sequence (grouping, twist), and I found myself running out of time and guessing.

I specifically took PT91, and the two killers were the electrician game and the crop rotation game. I've drilled since and realized I've tried to categorize first, but how the heck do you do these quickly?

Hi all,

I've been fool-proofing LG for the past week and a half, and as it pertains to sequencing games, it's become pretty clear to me that box items typically exert the most pressure on the board. Hence, whether it's a rule/question-driven game, looking at where to first place the box item will yield key inferences for the other rules. Along those lines, I noticed in some sequencing games with a twist that a rule preventing items from a sub-category from being next to other items in that same sub-category also exerts extreme pressure on the board (i.e. the notoriously difficult PT68G4, and to a much lesser extent, PT65G2). If we were to compare these two generic rules, it seems to me that the latter rule exerts even more pressure than the former. In other words, we should focus our attention first and foremost to the sub-category rule, even before a box rule in a scenario where both appear. Does this sound right to y'all? Also, if you guys have similar findings on some other generic rules that help you make inferences in different types of games, I'd appreciate it if you could share! Thanks and good luck on the studying!

For the time scheduling of the lsat that is done through Proctor U, does anyone know if we need to create an account with Proctor U before scheduling or do we wait for the email to come in with instructions? I tried to create an account but I didn't know what institution to put.

Hello fellow 7sagers, I am taking the June LSAT, so I have just over a week left of preparing! I am planning to take PrepTest 83 tomorrow morning, 6/2/22, and would like to know if anyone would like to also take it and then do a zoom call sometime in the afternoon to blind review the test together? This will be my second to last practice test before the real exam, currently have an average prep test score of 163. Message me if you would be interested and we can set something up!

Hi!

I apologize if this has been asked already but I couldn't find information on this! I was wondering if we signed up past the deadline for the 45$ score preview fee, would the 75$ fee be waived if we have a fee waiver or does this only apply to the 45$ fee?

Thank you in advance!!

These questions. DAH.

I went with C for 22 and D for 27. I even got them wrong in BR. I know these questions are pretty weird, but I would love help understanding why the correct answers are correct and why the answers I chose are wrong (though mostly the former).

Thanks in advance!

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-73-section-1-passage-3-passage/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-73-section-1-passage-3-questions/

PrepTest A - Section 1 - Question 8

This is a MSS question

It is a comparison statement between Fossilized bones of R and E Hominids

R contains a lower ratio S/C than E

There is a negative correlation between the ratio and the meat in the diet.

And we know the E eats meat

A Correct We can suggest that R also eats meat, at least some, cause it has a smaller ratio than E

B We don't know the composition of S in either

C We don't know the composition of C in either

D We don't know the ratio in either

E We don't know this, is not stated.

Admin Note: Edited title. For LR questions, please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

Listen and subscribe:

Apple Podcasts | Spotify

This week’s episode features 7Sage instructors ZeSean Ali and Nicole Agranonik, fresh off their 1L fall semesters at Columbia Law School and Berkeley Law. They share what law school is really like, what surprised them most during 1L, and the strategies that helped them survive their first semester. Tune in for practical tips and a clearer picture of what all that LSAT work is preparing you for.