Discussions

LSAT

New post

98 posts in the last 30 days

I take my LSAT next week, and I am in the low 160s at the moment. The literal only things on logical reasoning that is keeping me down are the conditional and causal reasoning questions. Are there any specific lessons from the syllabus that anyone found really, really helped with these? I know I could just rewatch all of them but due to my limited time I want to make sure I'm really prioritizing what matters here. Thanks! Good luck everyone

0

how do you guys do MBT and MSS conditional logic questions quickly / in a timely manner? When I am doing a timed run sometimes the language of the stim feels like gibberish to me so that doesn't help because I'm re-reading it several times. Then I also feel like diagramming the whole thing takes too much time. From there I'm already tempted to skip it. However, in BR, the answer feels way more obvious once I understand the logic at play -- it just takes too long to grasp the logic at play. If anyone feels the same as me, how did you 1. read the stimulis without freaking out / decipher it without needing to read it a million times 2. do you diagram it ? or do the inferences stand out in your head quite quickly? 3. Was it a matter of just drilling these questions more and then you got the hang of it ?

0
7S
•

Tuesday, Nov 18

7Sage

Official

Locking In for the January LSAT | LSAT Podcast

Listen and subscribe:

Apple Podcasts | Spotify

In this episode, Bailey and Henry discuss how to regain focus after a difficult fall LSAT. They outline practical steps for resetting your approach, rebuilding confidence, and creating a clear plan for the weeks leading up to the January exam. Listen in for advice on how to move forward with intention and improve your performance.

2

When we violate a principle, are we essentially negating that principle?

PRINCIPLE: If you intentionally misrepresent someone's beliefs, then you do so in the interest of another person.

VIOLATION: If you intentionally misrepresent someone's beliefs, then you DO NOT do so in the interest of another person.

I am basing my example off of LSAT PT 140 S1Q19.

0

Hi,

I was wondering about the approaches people take to diagramming.

Personally, I kind of start diagramming as I read. If the setup is pretty straightforward, I would write the game pieces and slots/board down when I reach them. But sometimes it's unclear which is optimum to use as pieces/board. I find that typically it is not crucial; rather a matter of preference. Often, I just go with what I have down already. (I'm only talking about cases when it doesn't appear essential.)

Although I probably won't be switching it up in the final few days, I'm curious to know how others approach this.

Thanks

0

Hey!

For the life of me, I cannot understand the level 5 difficulty questions for PSA. I can get the lower and medium difficulty questions correct, but it seems like the higher difficulty just isn't clicking. Does anyone have any tips or mental strategies for how they approach difficult PSA questions? I think I'm getting lost in the answers (and I believe my most common mistake is confusing sufficiency/necessity language even though I'll have it diagrammed properly!!)

4

Hi everyone,

I’m consistently scoring around -4 per LR section, and I’ve noticed a frustrating pattern. Two of the questions I miss are usually 4–5 star difficulty so fair enough. But the other two are often 3-star or easier, and when I review them, I immediately see the correct answer and understand exactly why it’s right. I usually just shake my head and wonder how I missed it.

Timing isn’t an issue. I’ve done a lot of timed practice, feel comfortable under time pressure, and usually have time at the end of each section to review any questions I flagged. By the time the section ends, I’m confident in almost every answer I’ve chosen, but I’m still missing these “should’ve got it” questions.

Has anyone else dealt with this? Any strategies or mental habits that helped you tighten up and eliminate these kinds of preventable mistakes?

Appreciate any advice.

0

Whenever I do diagram for a question, I find that I get very enveloped in it and as a result am less likely to notice the "gap" in the stimulus that needs to be connected for sufficient assumptions. Basically, I find diagramming to obscure this assumption recognition process for me. But I am not sure if this is because I am not diagramming correctly, if diagramming becomes less "involved" over time as you do more of it, or if my brain simply interprets the question better by not diagramming?

My process basically is: find assumption, then find the answer choice that connects the two "unconnected" ideas, then just confirm that the necessary and sufficient positioning isn't making some sort of flaw (e.g. mistaking necessary for sufficient or vice versa).

I'm studying for a 167+, so any advice on how to reduce my margin of error for this process would be appreciated! Last PT was a 161 (which was the official Jan LSAT).

0

Omg I've been wracking my brain trying to think through this question, could really use some help!!

I have trouble understanding why D is correct.

I dismissed it because D claims that the two faulty studies do not support a causal finding, when the premise is based on the two study's correlational finding. The conclusion also specifically clarifies that it only applies under the assumption that "IF night lights cause nearsightedness," so even if the studies are faulty and do not support a causal finding, it doesn't hurt a conclusion that already operates under a world where night lights do cause nearsightedness.

Any help would be appreciated. Thanks!!!!

0

I find myself getting stuck on a lot of weaken/strengthen questions in RC because I just don't know how to approach it. In LR I always tell myself to look for assumptions and overlooked possibilities, and in general think of making the premises less supportive or stronger support for the conclusion, and also staying away from trap answers that independently attack the conclusion or deny premises. However, in RC there's not really clear premises or reasoning so I find it hard to wrap my head around how we're supposed to then strengthen or weaken an author's argument, and whether we should consider ACs that seem to independently go against their position or give an independent reason to strengthen it.

Any suggestions on how to think about these questions?

0

My problem on this Q is that I can exclude the other four wrong answer choices, but I can't find the right answer choice right either.

Here is my thought:

The premise: no free market economy -> the maximum total utility is not assured;

The conclusion: a country is not trying to bring about a free market economy -> the country is not acting in the way most likely to bring about the maximum total utility.

The right answer choice: the argument wrongly presumes that trying to bring about a condition that will assure the achievement of an end -> the way most likely to achieve that end.

However, if I put this presumption back to the argument, what is negated in the argument is the sufficient condition here ( to assure the achievement of an end is not satisfied ). This negation doesn't get to the argument's conclusion, which is the negation of the necessary condition in the answer choice ( not the way most likely to achieve that end). So I feel the right answer choice should be like "wrongly presumes that the way most likely to achieve max utility -> trying to bring about a condition that will ensure its achievement."

Could anyone give some light?

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-39-section-4-question-23/

0

I'm trying to work now to get my RC score down to the -5 range, and I'm drilling a lot on the passage types im bad at, and most of the hard or hardest passages I'll get 2 or 3 wrong, and on the easier ones, 1 or 2 maybe, if I get a good selection of passages its likely I;ll be in that -6 range. EXCEPT for spotlight passages; something about spotlight passages just doesn't click for me, there's a majority 1 star or 2 star passages where I'll get straight up 4 out of 6 or 7 ACs wrong, and I don't understand why, does anyone have any tips? I'm confident my LR will be at -4/5 for August/Sept LSAT, but if I can't get my RC out of the -7/8 zone I won't be able to get a 165

0

I have been doing really well on the first 60-65 questions of my practice tests, getting very few wrong, but it is in the last dozen or so questions on the final LR section of the tests where I am getting a majority of my questions wrong. I am aware that the test gradually gets harder throughout the section, but I am unsure why I am struggling so much with this part because I get most of the harder ones right when I drill. Should I be practicing harder drills? If anyone has advice on this problem, let me know.

0

Pretty much what the title says. My main issue is with LR. I used to be able to score 18/25. Then I hit a couple highs of 20/25 and was very, very happy. A week before, I started getting 16/15/14 out of 25, a pretty big dip. Took the Sept test, then about a week break. Did a section drill yesterday, got a 13/25. Is my brain broken? Was it too much to hope for a linear increase? For reference, I work full time, so MTWRF I study 4 hours daily: I wake up an hour before work to study, the hour of my lunch break, and 2 hours when I get home. The weekends are about 8-10 hour days for me. Is it too much to hope for a 160 by Oct?

Send Help.

0

I NEVER thought I would get to the point of actually being interested in the test just for the sake of information but here I am. 🤡

There was a really interesting LR question on the November test about a bird that makes a high-pitched warning call... Does anyone remember what kind of bird it was?? I genuinely want to look it up!

2

Confirm action

Are you sure?