98 posts in the last 30 days

Hi,

I chose C here because I thought it was supported by lines 5-7 and I didn't choose B because I didn't see how the passage showed how laws were less/more rigid (since I didn't see anything about laws being flexible or changeable). Can anyone help explain why B is right and C is wrong?

Any #help would be very appreciated!

Thanks!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-33-section-2-passage-4-questions/

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.

In hindsight I understand why D is correct (PT 3 section 2 Q 9), but I eliminated it because in the STIMULUS the comparison was to the same amount of whole milk. The question stem tells us that the coconut oil doesn't "usually cause" the blood cholesterol level to rise which allows us to consider the fact that people use more of one product than another. Is this type of chunky question stem that allows for a gap in reasoning that wasn't present in the stimulus happen in other LSAT LR questions? Or is this abnormal since it's a very old test?

How should I plan my LG fool proof if I am aiming for the October test? Last year I studied for 2 months and stopped. I am redoing the CC again and I just started with the Games section in the CC. After I FP the games that are in the lessons what should my next step be? Should I go for the 1-35 bundle for example. And how many games should I do a day and so on? I would appreciate some advice!!

The problem sets for the Most Strongly Supported Statements have been very helpful in fine tuning my skills. However, I am in dire need of help with the questions that are considered High Priority. I cannot seem to correctly figure them out.

What works best for you?

Hi, I've been hitting the mid-high 160's and I'm finding my core weakness is not understanding what the ACs are saying. This means the AC is using hard referential phrasing, or weird grammar like using embedded clauses without commas / run-on sentences, or the wording is just ambiguous.

I'm trying to parse the sentence piece by piece in my BR, but does anyone have any help for this issue?

My solutions so far are: parse word by word / phrase by phrase in BR, reduce the AC down to subject verb object. This is still really hard and I miss a lot of questions just because I don't know what the AC is trying to tell me. Thanks!

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!

Hi,

For some reason, I just found this question really difficult. I was really kind of stuck between B and E, and I wasn't sure about either of them because it is hard to find direct textual evidence that I can connect back to what the question is asking for. For instance, B looked right because of lines 35-36. E looked sort of right due to lines 57-58. However, what made it really hard for me to decide the answer choice was lines 32-35-- if finding common grounds to communicate is "impossible" then how is it "resolvable" in the first place? This sentence made A look sort of right, and made me doubt my previous thinking...

Can anyone give an explanation for this question?

Any #help would be appreciated!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-31-section-4-passage-4-questions/

PT30 Game 2

The six messages on an answering machine were each left by one of Fleure, Greta, Hildy, Liam, Pasquale, or Theodore...

Anyone know of similar games? This one cost me a perfect LG section... which was infuriating because it's so easy once you get it. Wanting to try a similar game fresh.

Hi,

When I was looking at the answer choices for this question, I noticed that answer choice B states something about "actual legal dilemmas". As a result, I rejected answer choice B because, while I noticed the mention of legal dilemmas in general throughout the passage, I did not see any mention of a single "actual" legal dilemma example. However, when looking at other answer explanations, no one seems to mention this as a reason for rejecting answer choice B. Is my perception of what "_actual_legal dilemma" means correct here or am I just fantasizing? I understand why E is right and why A,C,D are wrong. #help

Thanks!

Admin note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-30-section-3-passage-3-questions/

So I’m having some difficulty eliminating Answer choice A and wondering why my interpretation of it is incorrect.

A says: “The truth of a given description is independent of its emotional vividness.”

I interpreted this to mean, whether a description is true or false is independent of emotional vividness. I remember from both passages that the respective authors thought that telling lies increased emotional vividness, so I thought A was correct by reasoning that if something is untrue then emotional vividness increases. Shakespeare in the first passage and subjectivity in autobiography in the second illustrated this. So I reasoned that truthfulness, as interpreted as being true or false is not independent of emotional vividness, because at least of aspect of truthfulness, being false—increases emotional vividness.

Obviously, this was an incorrect interpretation. Just wondering how I could know that from reading the answer choice, and how I could ascertain the correct one.

Thanks!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-88-section-3-passage-2-questions/

For those who want to come- Prep Test 83 BR call on Thursday evening for the first LR at 7:00 pm Eastern and also 7:00 pm Eastern on Friday for the second LR. This will be a collaborative style BR. Please take the test or sections and do your own BR first but don’t score the section. We would like to have a good discussion and hear different perspectives/ reasoning which is most effective when people don’t know the answers.

We will meet via Zoom. Here is the link: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/7769566542

I am working on the LG section of the CC. I am fool proofing all of the games as I go through them, examples and timed sections. How much time should I plan to give between runs on a particular game? After writing a game out 3-4 times (twice a day), I am able to get it down quickly, but I also feel like I am just memorizing. Is there a particular set of games that we are supposed to full proof or just do them as we go? I am also planning on testing in August, so I have about 3 months to work with.

Is anyone else familiar with JY's suggestion of turning weakening questions into resolve questions (essentially reading all the premises and negating the conclusion in the stimulus, ultimately creating a paradox)? I have a lot of trouble with weakening questions, but when I turn them into resolve questions they seem so much easier to solve. Is this a method that I should adapt or could it become detrimental?

User Avatar

Sunday, May 28 2017

PT4.S1.Q10

I'm adding my explanation to this question since it doesn't currently exist on 7sage. Feel free to critique my reasoning.

This is a necessary assumption question. We know this because the question stem says the argument above makes which one of the following assumptions? The correct AC must be an assumption we know the argument makes. Therefore, it is a necessary assumption.

P: R bacteria provide nitrogen to bean plants and other legumes. Nitrogen is an essential plant nutrient. Wheat must normally be supplied nitrogen by nitrogen fertilizer.

C: If technology produces wheat strains that will host R bacteria, the need for fertilizers will be reduced.

Flaw: I originally thought but what if nitrogen is not the only essential plant nutrient for plants to grow? Might the need for fertilizer remain? B plays on this erroneous understanding. This isn't the actual flaw.

A. 'should' is irrelevant. This is not about what should happen it's about what is/will happen.

B. This was temping and it the trap answer choice. The conclusion says the need for artificial fertilizers will be reduced if biotech succeeds in producing wheat strains who host R bacteria. What about other reasons growers need to add fertilizer? Can we conclude from no longer needing nitrogen that fertilizer demand in general will be reduced? Even if nitrogen only comprises a small subset of all fertilizer use, if we eliminate the nitrogen need, then yes, the fertilizer demand will be reduced. This is true even if nitrogen is not the only soil nutrient that must be supplied. The key word to not falling for this trap answer choice is "reduced." Perhaps I was temped because I was thinking "eliminated." If the conclusion said the demand would be eliminated then yes nitrogen would have to be the only reason growers use fertilizer.

C. This is not necessary. It talks about other grasses but even if it didn't, even if there are strains of wheat that do have R naturally, we know there are some that aren't. That's what the whole argument is about so this is irrelevant.

D. Similar reasoning to C. We don't need legumes to be the only crops that produce nitrogen. We know some wheats don't and we know there is an existing need for nitrogen based fertilizer. The argument is simply saying the need will go down if wheat is modified to host R bacteria.

E. This is absolutely necessary. If the R bacteria did not produce nitrogen in the wheat roots then it wouldn't reduce the need for artificial fertilizer. This is the true flaw. Just because the plant will host the bacteria doesn't mean that it will necessarily have the desired effect.

#help# For this question, I eliminated all 5 answers, because I think none of them are right. The right answer is E, but I doubted it. Since E only said the period of Bruno's tenure is just matching exactly to the period when the spy was transmitting information. There could be many people or clergies working in the French embassy at that time, how can this choice exclude this possible alternative and support the argument???

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

User Avatar

Thursday, Mar 21 2024

RC Help

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.

Confirm action

Are you sure?