Is a writing board allowed for the online LSAT (just a wooden/plastic board to place the scratch paper on), most table surfaces aren't conducive to placing the paper directly on them and writing on the same. I have mailed LSAC but just wanted to know if anyone who has taken the online LSAT has used it or has been asked by the Proctor not to use it?

Well i speedran through the cc and the variety in the number of questions was initially pretty difficult for me to properly adjust to, given that the methods listed in the cc are somewhat distinct from each other. I tried a section and struggled. However, now that I consciously take note of the main point, premise, and maybe some implied basis for support, the questions just seem to be going right for me. I'm still not where I want to be, but it's a start. Has anyone else been where I am? If so, has this method of just having an insane focus on the mp, premise, and support been of greater use to you than using conditional logic, especially in questions where it gets particularly tricky to use cl?

To my understanding, the push stoke was a defect with the new garden rake. And if it is the only defect, then the evaluation between the new gardening rake and the straight rake stands cause it is base on the whatever defect the new gardening rake has and it is the push stoke.

I need help to understand when to switch & negate a valid conclusions on contrapositives. The videos from Invalid Argument Forms are confusing and are just not clicking. When I think I know how to "draw valid conclusions w/ transitions AND w/ intersection statements" I suddenly don't and don't know what I'm doing wrong. Can anyone suggest the videos or any other methods to review to understand the material?

Ever since we got to this section, I've been confused.

I was told from previous test takers that we can select dates under different country for flex tests

can anyone confirm this?

Is there a diagnostic test you can take if you plan to take the LSAT in August 2024 or onward from there? Or should I take an old test that still has the LG section?

Can someone explain why B is the right answer? The stem states that it is unknown why people purchased broadsides, or how their beliefs related to the broadsides. If these statements are true, why does having having crime and adultery in the broadsides show that people may not have been serious about moral values? Aren't the two given statements proof that the broadsides don't have to be truly moral for the 17th century people to be moral?

The gap is the owners has right to destory the art works from the ethical point of view even if the owner possess it legally. The premise is the possess it legally , and destory ethically is the core.

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

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!

So I took the today's exam and I am currently feeling I bombed it so bad. I had one with the 3 LR's and I really screwed in RC. I guessed about 5 questions just in RC and probably missed another 6-7 questions top of that guessed ones.

My situation is little unique. It's my 4th time taking LSAT and previously I had 151,cancelled, and 162. If I cancel today's exam, I will not retake and apply in the coming cycle with my current numbers but I am wondering if that cancellation or lowest score from today's exam (such as like 155-157) will hurt my admission chance.

Some people suggested me that since the schools are only looking for the highest score anyway, it will not really hurting anything but I am so worrying right now.

Does anyone have any tips regarding familiarizing oneself with law passages (e.g., reading materials, websites)? When I am unfamiliar with a topic whether in RC or LR, I end up re-reading a lot even though I have a fair grasp on the logic. Any tips and tricks would be appreciated!

Hi everyone,

I am wondering if anyone would be willing to post the ways in which they go about tackling the LR section of the the LSAT. Thus far through my studies LR was always my best section naturally so I did not focus on it as much. However, now that I am trying to learn it I often times get stuck on choosing the best answer choice. The question types do not bog me down it is more so the stimulus often times confuse me with all of the extra details. I am open to suggestions, tips or even a study partner since I take the test in June.

The furthest I got to solving this question was diagramming it:

mR-s-/best

mR=mT

Beauty=truth----> mR=best

Beauty=/=truth

Is there a structural way to approaching this question? Because the overlapping terms are very confusing.

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-49-section-4-question-16/

Hi all,

I picked the right answer but my prediction of the main point was quite different from the language of the credited choice.

My prediction: the origin of the scholars' nonpoetic emphasis was due to Milman Parry.

When I read the first paragraph, my attention was caught by this sentence "Something wsa driving scholars away from the actual work to peripheral issues" (Lines 14-15).

Could someone explain why the reason/origin of the nonpoetic emphasis is deemed as not a part in the main point?

Thanks!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-25-section-1-passage-2-questions/

I'm fairly new to 7Sage, but I am curious to know others' thoughts on this. Should I keep doing problem sets in a specific category if I am getting them right every time? Even without blind review? Not trying to brag or anything here, just genuinely curious of what others are doing.

Hi everyone!! I have been viewing all these posts here on 7Sage and saw really useful suggestions for my LSAT prep. I have scheduled April 2022 digital lsat, yet still I got my PT score average at 160 (only started prepping from February). My LR score raised from -15 to -3 ~ -5 now after I finished loophole (just skim through) and LSAT Trainer (another skim through) and Powerscore Bible LR. I am currently working on the Manhattan LG prep book and find it useful for my LG score boost. Just wondering is there anyone who has used the Manhattan LR book and raised score even after a relatively OK level (such as -3 to -5)? By the way, I am struggling at RC and still do not find a helpful prep book and haven't developed my own strategies for this section. Is there any suggestion? Thank you so much and hope everyone can kill this monster. : )

Flaw Question-- calling all folks who are a beast at LR:) HELP?

I understand that the answer is C but I want to make sure that I'm breaking down the argument correctly:

*Best way to understand --> Direct Empathy (that's what some psychologists claim, and we're supposing they're right)

*/Direct Empathy ("since it's impossible to gain a direct and complete grasp of another person's motivations" aka Direct Empathy-- I believe this is what the author takes as the truth)

THUS, no way at all to understand (already problem here, it should have been THUS, "no best way to understand" rather than "no way at all to understand")

But that's not even the main conclusion...

*Understand ("One can understand other people"-- again, this is what the author takes as the truth)

THUS, the psychologists' claim is wrong-- it's wrong to state that (best way to understand --> Direct Empathy)

The problem is that the author cannot state that the psychologists' claim is wrong because the author's evidence is flawed--- assumes there's no way when the psychologists are only talking about best way.

However, I'd like to go deeper into this question and modify it-- what if the author correctly said it was "best way to understand" as opposed to "no way at all to understand"-- would the argument be valid then??

*Best way to understand --> Direct Empathy (that's what some psychologists claim, and we're supposing they're right)

*/Direct Empathy ("since it's impossible to gain a direct and complete grasp of another person's motivations" aka Direct Empathy-- I believe this is what the author takes as the truth)

THUS, there's no best way to understand

*Best way to understand (my modified premise-- "But there is a best way to understand people")

THUS, the psychologists' claim is wrong-- it's wrong to state that (best way to understand -> Direct Empathy)

In this case, is the argument's conclusion valid? It's TRUE that the psychologists' claim is wrong because ultimately what we have is... we know it's true that /Direct Empathy & there is best way to understand ... so we can't validly get to "Best way to understand --> Direct Empathy"

(Am I thinking correctly? lol)

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-34-section-2-question-11/

So Ive been taking preptests and I seem to be stuck getting -1/-5 on LR. ITS DRIVING ME INSANE. I cant seem to get a perfect score on this section and was wondering how some y'all are studying for LR or how you went about drastically reducing the number of LR questions you get wrong?

https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/advanced-valid-forms-review/

We have B-most->Z which implies two inferences B-most->C and B-most->/O. When you combine B-most->Z with B-most->/P, that gives you the inference /P some Z. But can you also then take the two previous inferences, B-most->C and B-most->/O, in combination with B-most->/P to create to additional inferences, /P some C and /P some /O, respectively? If those last two inferences are not valid inferences, then why are they not? I ask because in the comments on the lesson, someone stated that you can infer /P some Z but NOT /P some C and /P some /O, which makes zero sense to me.

Is anyone good at answering these? This question type is the one i am have the most trouble with. How should I approach it? As a strengthening or a SA? Is there a better way to answer these?

Hi fellow students! I'm a bit confused about the question listed above. I picked A, because I thought this would reconcile the issue with sample size. But the correct answer is C, and I don't really understand why... couldn't the percentages refer to different groups of people? So why would it matter that they're almost the same?

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

Hi 7Sage Forum! I am looking for strategies on identifying the Sufficient and Necessary Assumptions in questions. I find myself understanding the material but am getting bogged down in language. Still working through the 7sage curriculum however any advice would be helpful! Thanks!

Hi,

I wanna discuss the approach to this question.

I picked the right answer but I spend too muhc time on this one.

When I first looked at it, because of "based on the passage", I thought this is not a inference type of question but more like an "strict evidence/text-referencing" question. Unfortunately to me, there is no direct explaination about what's the retributive nature, so I have to use my back-up plan, which is POE and I was left with B.

So my question is: which part of the question stem can lead us to think that this is a inference question? If you could share your approach on this question, I would very appreciate it!

Thanks.

I'm really struggling to set up my game boards both quickly and in a manner that is helpful to solve the games. For example, I did PT 34, S4 today and could not for the life of me figure out how to set up the game board. Once I watched the explanation, it made total sense and it took me about :30 to answer each question.

Are there videos/tutorials I'm missing outside of these following lessons?:

Introduction to Logic Games & Sequencing Games

Sequencing Games with a Twist

Introduction to Grouping Games: The In-Out Games

Grouping Games

Grouping Games with a Chart

Grouping and Sequencing Games

Any other resources on learning how to set up game boards quickly and in a manner that actually helps the game would be much appreciated!

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?