If we already have a ProctorU account, do we have to use the login credentials that LSAC emailed us with? I already registered for a time slot with the account I already made. Thanks!

I just want to make sure I’m thinking about this right. I did a game where one rule said if H is in, G is not. And another rule said if J is not in, S is in. So when diagramming, if the slash is through the right variable (necessary condition) it’s always true that both can be out but both can’t be in. If the slash is through the left (sufficient condition) it’s always true that both can be in but both can’t be out (at least one must be in). Right? I tend to make reversal mistakes so I’m trying to make sure I fully understand.

Bee -> sting once

Sting once

—————

Bee

A-> B

B

—————

A

A) Spring -> Sneeze nonstop

Sneeze

——————

Spring

C) Old + brittle -> move with care

/Move with care -> /Old + brittle

Negation: Old + brittle -> Move w care (still valid argument whereas the stimulus is invalid).

D) Only is G2

Ruin roof -> more thunderstorm

/Ruin roof -> /more thunderstorm

Hi everyone! I will be taking the October test as my second attempt, and while I know things are pretty set in stone at this point, I was wondering if there were any last minute quick strategies people had to share? My LR has been hovering around the -6/-8 range for tests in the 80s and I would love to get that down to -5!

Hi everyone! I’m hoping to get some unbiased advice on what you guys think is the best option in my situation.

Long story short I have been at this for a while. I have already tested two times (I cancelled my first score as a first time test taker) and was not impressed with my score. I relied heavily on LG and LR because I was terrible in RC. This is the mindset I had with the first two tests I took so it didn’t go well for me.

After realizing I would need to test again, I started with a new tutor for RC about a month ago and it has helped a ton so far. She has a method that is different from any other method I have learned where it’s more of a strategical/step by step approach. It’s different from what people typically tutor in RC, but nonetheless, very helpful so far. The only issue i’m having is the method either isn’t very consistent (I notice some passages I go -4 or less… other passages -10 plus) or i’m not comfortable with it yet. My tutor says that this is a foolproof way to get up there in the highway percentile of test takers…but it takes a couple of months to perfect it. I don’t think i’m terrible, however, definitely not scoring consistently where I would need to be to not heavily rely on the other two sections (sometimes… other times i’m fine so it’s hard to say)

I scheduled my test for June and it’s the last chance I have to go to law school in the fall so I really want to give it a shot but i’m worried about having so many tests on my record. What are the odds of me improving with this method in the last week? Should I take the test? If I do have to test again in August will having 4 tests look really bad for me? I’ve always heard admission only looks at the highest score but i’m worried having 4 will look awful for me.

THANK YOU

Ok so pretty much X 50 ppl

Y has 100 ppl

X 1 person hospitalized

Y has 4 ppl hospitalized

So initially I thought this doesn't really seem like a paradox but wtv, lets just explain why Y has more hospital patients.

A. Ok if preventive health programs are more common X than in Y that'll explain why Y has more people in hospitals.

B. (I was between this and D just because I couldn't eliminate D) This actually explains the phenomena though. If city X is a leader in outpatient treatment whenever possible that explains why they have less hospitalizations they just send everyone home.

C. Perfect the drinking water of Y has DANGEROUSLY high toxins compared to that of X so that could cause more people to be sick and end up in hospitals

D*: (Read carefully) The hospitals in Y are of high quality and X ppl are sent there for treatment. Ok just because X people are sent there let's say to get the pain medication that wouldn't explain why Y has more hospital patients. They could just go get the medication and leave.

E. Fair assumption to make that if stress is correlated with higher hospitalizations

Anyone interested in joining our study group. Let me know.

I took a diagnostic a few weeks ago but haven’t taken any full PTs since then. Right now, I’m only partially through the curriculum, I’ve made some progress in the Logical Reasoning section but haven’t touched Reading Comp yet.

I’m tempted to start taking full-length practice tests to begin building endurance and test-day skills, but I’m also worried it might be too early. I don’t want to waste time on PTs if I’d be better off continuing through the lessons first.

When should I start taking full PTs?

I took my diagnostic test recently, my test score was pretty mediocre. I feel confident in my LR sections, this is my strength. I always enjoyed this section and I am pretty consistent in getting these right. However, I tanked in the LG and RC section. I ran out of time in RC and that's were most of my missed questions came from. In the LG section, I read them all, but could not make sense of how to diagram or where to start.

I am aiming for the LSAT in October, but will probably take the Aug. test depending. I know I can score in my target range, but I really need to get the LG / RC sections up if I am to do so.

My question is, should I skip to LG / RC sections in the 7sage curriculum and focus on building these skills up? Or continue to work through the curriculum in order as listed? Does the material build on and I will be missing the fundamentals to LG or would it be okay to skip around and target my weak areas?

Any advise would be appreciated. Thanks!

Can someone explain PTC, S2 Q08? I am trying to understand why A is the right answer and why the other answers are wrong.

Thank you for your help.

I was wondering how I should attack/understand this question?

It asks if it discusses the relationship between the reliability and one of the AC's. What does relationship mean in this case? Is the question asking if the passage mentions some sort of a connection between the reliability and one of the answer choices?

Thank you.

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.

Hi,

Since this has no video explanation for it, I want to know whether I fell in line with the rest when I reached that conclusion. In this question, the author argues that butter manufacturers should be allowed to call their products "Can't believe it's not butter or Skim fat butter" to ward off any negative nuances from the term "Imitation butter". This person cites two reasons to back up one's allegation. A) People should be fostered to consume more low fat butter products because of their health concerns, arising from a high cholesterol level. B) This hostile naming like Knock-off/Ersatz could stave potential consumers off from those well-intentioned products owing to their aversion to the names. In that way, the industry could push people to indulge in more butterfat which could pose a threat to their health (esp. cardiovascular). In order to weaken this assertion, I thought it would be better off for me to claim that this aversion could beget more positive results healthwise for those buyers in the market. What if they, finding those suggestive names unbearably repulsive, decided to find the authentic low fat butter products which significantly slashed the fat content? For instance, they would rather find a real McCoy low fat butter, projecting an image of authenticity,instead of phonier butter substitutes, which happened to have less butterfat in it? People who voted for Trump would rather turn to him to gratify their desires, whatever they might be, in lieu of settling down for his miniature, Ron DeSantis, emulating his extreme creeds. I just thought that it was important for me to tackle the author's point that the negative naming could take a toll on public health because it deters people from purchasing the imitation butter which is healthier for them thanks to the low fat content in comparison with the regular ones. Thus, one of the ramifications was supposed to bear the unexpected consequence that made everyone more robust and hale: cutting off the consumption of butterfat more noticeably than what was expected from the fake butter. What are your thoughts on this? I would like to hear from other would-be legal minds. Thanks!

Hi all,

I've been struggling to wrap my head around this question (i'll post below). Can anyone explain this?

"It must be true that the lowest-numbered line on which" changes to "no lower than line". . . Why is it not that F can be lines 2 or 1?

It must be true that the lowest-numbered line on which

(A) F can be assembled is line 2

(B) G can be assembled is line 3

(C) J can be assembled is line 2

(D) K can be assembled is line 3

(E) M can be assembled is line 2

(A): Does it have to be true that F can be no lower than line 2? In other words, could F be 1st?

F could be lower than line 2! We have no rules stopping F from being 1st, and for completion’s sake—though you probably wouldn’t do this on Test Day—we’ll give you an example. F could be 1st, for example if the order were: FMGSJKH. Although there are several other possible scenarios in which F can be 1st, finding just one is sufficient to determine that this choice’s statement “could be false.”

LR- PTB.S1.Q1

Misread the question and u was stuck between two answer choices that I thought would be correct. I need to understand the main point for this question because it can lead to tricky answer choices.

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

hi! (fair warning, this a question from is the genuinely tragic mirrors passage btw): for the life of me, i cannot figure out why c is the right choice for this one. i think it's largely because i literally just don't understand what the answer choice means. like genuinely word-wise.

i get that the idea of "separating observers from scientific phenomenon" as it's discussed in the text + how this informs the tendency of scientists to prefer certain explanations for phenomena. but i don't understand how that idea is conveyed by answer choice c. answer c reads: "One explanation of what mirrors do reveals the traditional tendency of physicists to separate a phenomenon to be explained from the observer of a phenomenon."

i've been racking my head trying to parse the bolded part word-by-word but i genuinely can't figure it out. isn't the point the text is making that science ppl prefer explanations that don't rely on the observer? how does "separating a phenomenon •••to be explained••• from the observer of a phenomenon" do that?? if someone could even just help break down what this part means that would be useful lol. ty in advance (3(/p)

I get most of my LSAT LR drills correct (usually except for the hardest difficulty) and I find myself overthinking those really hard questions because I am trying to practice a methodology and skill instead of relying on my intuition, that gets the easier/medium/hard questions right. I'm just wondering what my approach should be.

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

Hey! I have been studying for a few months with my test in October. Lately I have been super focused on getting the LR wrong answers down. I average at -6 with my lowest -3. I usually have 2-3 minutes left to go over my flagged questions, so I do not think timing is the issue. I only get 5 star, sometimes 4 star, questions wrong. What is the best strategy I can use this next month to get my wrong answers down?

Hi everyone,

I am late to the game and I am using this summer to tackle studying for the LSAT, and taking the August exam.

I know this is an overly ambitious plan of attack but sadly I do not have many other options.

That being said, does anyone have any tips or advice on how I should approach this?? I am not sure if I am better off trying to complete all of the foundational material and lessons, or skipping around or what.

I do not have enough time to complete all 900+ hours of the program before August, so that being said any suggestions are greatly appreciated.

As of now, I am getting through the foundations and then going to begin incorporating the practice tests and such starting mid June, and then from there out switch between the foundation and practice. Not sure if this is the best approach though.

Thank you ! And Goodluck to everyone !

For statements with if and only if, does it matter which variable I write first?

Example: V is selected if and only if P is selected

the if and only if here is referring to P so the solutions in the book show

P (--) V

not V (--) not P

but if I wrote it out as

V (--) P

not P (--) not V

Would that be correct since this is a biconditional statement? if past would make P sufficient condition and the only if part would make P the necessary condition. Am I thinking of this correctly?

Also, can I think of biconditionals as implying that the two variable must always go together meaning that PV will always be together in the "in" group or in the "out" group. There is never a possibilities where one variable is in and the other is out. So, I could show them as a block in my diagram.

I got this wrong initially by marking down A but the correct answer is E. This stimulus tells us a few things

It can be hard to tell whether adults can be held morally responsible for the treatment they receive because its hard to know if that is on their control or not.

Sometimes people's actions are the inevitable consequences of the treatment they received when they were an infant (and since infants can't control anything they can't be morally responsible for receiving that treatment).

What absolutely MUST be true here?

A. an infant's actions are not on the chopping block here + never is really strong language

B. maybe this is true but it feels really tangential

C. this concept of partial responsibility does not exist anywhere in the stimulus we are operating in a binary universe

D. we know that the statement (people cannot be morally responsible for things they can't control and the inevitable consequences of things they can't control) is true but this offers a false contraposition of that statement (suff - neck confusion)

E. If everyone sometimes performs acts for which they are not morally responsible, that means that no-one should be held morally responsible for every act one performs.

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

I take the exam on Sunday and im in need of some last minute tips. I dont plan on taking another PT but I will be drilling and taking individual sections over the next 3 days.

How do I tackle 4-5 level LR questions? On the PT I just took I got every question right except for the 6 questions that were 4-5 level difficulty. I thought I got them all right but I fell for every trap answer ):

Any suggestions on increasing RC score a couple points? Even if it is new strategies / how to eliminate wrong answer choices? Im awful at this section and have not been able to increase my score consistently. The best I've gone was -6 but just now I got -11.

Hello,

I was wondering if anyone knew more the less the frequency of Hybrid Games in the Logic Games section of the LSAT??

So out of 4 Games, how many are likely to be Hybrid games? All of them, half of them, maybe one?

As I was practicing the PTs offered here in 7sage, I noticed that pretty much every single Logic Game in the more current exams are a Hybrid of sequencing, matching, and grouping and all of them were quite elaborate. None of them were exclusively sequencing, matching, or grouping. Is this how the LSAT will be? All Hybrid? If so it's fine I just would like to know if anyone has any insight or previous experience.

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?