I know this is a very basic necessary/sufficient question but could someone validate the way I diagramed the logic?

Stim:

Professor: both O parents --> only O child

Student: not [both O parents --> only O child], but the student switched the professor's statement around to mean [only O child --> both O parents]. So given his logic, /both O parents --> /only O child (since he's Type B).

ACs:

A) only O child --> both O parents

B) both O parents --> /type B child

C) both B parents --> only O children

D) irrelevant

E) both B parents --> type B children

#help

While Ive been working through BRing Reading Comp passages in the past week, Ive been using outside explanations to help me understand where my gap in reasoning lies. While I think it might help in the long run, its inevitably extremely difficult to remember the logical reasoning behind every single question. That being said, would I be better off figuring out the logical reasoning on my own or continuing to use outside explanations for right/wrong answers? My concern is whether I am cheating the process by possibly not fully thinking it through on my own. Any tips will be helpful! Thanks!

Hey all,

Is there a good way to get better at the questions involving finding the main point of the passage(s) and understanding/analyzing the purpose of a phrase in context? Also, parsing out the attitude of the author. I'm not doing well with these and unfortunately, they are the kinds of questions that are included in most passage sections without fail. SOS

-TP

Just making sure I am right for the right reasons

Not being able to hear -----> Not every permutation is understandable----> Not Spoken Language completely effecient.

AC E

I'm having trouble figuring out the argument in this stimulus. I believe its saying:

Premise: While health care in other Western countries is supported by their tax revenues, the US government does not provide health care via tax. The US public health-care expense is ~5% of the GDP, but private is 7%. Thus, this 7% is tax.

Conclusion: It is incorrect to say that people of the US are "lightly taxed."

What the hell does that mean? This argument literally makes no sense. I can't follow which is probably why I can't pinpoint the flaw.

Any input would be helpful!

I am having a hard time finding the link for this according to the tutorial video. Anyone have this problem?

Hey all,

Like many, I've doing a number of PTs and find that parallel flaw questions are my weakest point in LR.

I was wondering if anyone had advice about when to use mapping on parallel flaw questions vs. when to intuit the flaw and answer choice match?

For example, I've just completed PT 53, and JY uses a conditional map for Question 21 Section 1. I realized after watching JY's explanation that trying to reason through or intuit this flaw would have been rather futile.

However, on the same PT—Question 13 Section 3, JY reasons through the flaw in his explanation. His explanation was great (it was a part relating to whole flaw) but I'm not confident in my ability to know when to use reason and when to use maps.

If anyone who is proficient at Parallel Flaw questions could share language cues or other details they use to know when maps are optimal and when they should reason through the question, I would really, really appreciate them!

Thanks so much, *also my first 7Sage post.

Listen and subscribe:

Apple Podcasts | Spotify

Discover the study habits that move LSAT scores forward and the ones that hold progress back. This episode explains why untimed drills, careful review, and rest days matter more than nonstop timed practice. Tune in for practical strategies to break through plateaus and study smarter, not harder.

Did anyone find a more simpler way to tackle game 4 in this pt?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-64-section-2-game-4/

Just finished the November lsat flex.

I got LR-RC-LG. LR was very easy and it’s probably like something in the 60s. RC was just brutal, and I feel it’s even harder than the October’s RC. LG was always my best section (average about -0 or -1), but this time I just feel really bad. I don’t know if it’s because LG was the lsat section or what, but I just could not make any useful inferences at all.

I got 161 in the October test and I’m wondering if I should cancel this test or not.

should I just use the 161 to apply my safe schools and retake in January?

Curious what people think about this question. The second rationale is essentially that a punishment should fit the severity of the crime. Applied to the answer choices, we are to understand that we are not looking for an exact match, but rather a consistent parallel form of reasoning.

So, rationale: punishment = severity of crime.

A: Correctness = fairness

B: Correctness = what society deems correct

C: Correctness = consequences + inherent fairness

D: Correctness = consequences + intuitive rightness

E: Correctness = consequences

Curious on why A is the best answer. Fairness? Is this because attaching fairness to the correctness of an action is consistent with determining the severity of a punishment on the severity of the crime? There's no clear linkage.

I just thought of this today and wanted to know if it would be an issue, the place I have been practicing for the LSAT in and where I plan to take it from is an upstairs room that doubles as a storage place for all my parents useless things that they don't want to throw out but do not need currently. Examples are scrap books, non perishable food, suitcases, pictures and some more things like that. The room is big and in the center I have my big desk I have been working at, nothing around me is of any academic value but will I be required to move things out of the room?

Hi all,

I’m looking for a study buddy who’s really solid with RC — I used to average max -3 on RC with older tests but am now doing worse than before — now I sometimes get -7. I am currently averaging anywhere from 168-173. If anyone would benefit from explaining how they arrive at certain answers/compare PTs — DM me! Would love to meet via Zoom couple of times throughout the week until the Nov flex.

I don't really know what's wrong with me, but after finishing my final exam for my summer class today, I decided to do a section of RC, lol. Yesterday, I took a section of LR from PT 55, so I figured it made sense that if I were to do another section, it should also be from PT 55 (I've decided to sacrificed this one long ago).

Here are some thoughts and reflection from multiple attempts at RC to get a perfect score from an English major ... (take it with a grain of salt, maybe the terrible heat finally triggered something in me, IDK.)

0) it might be possible

TRUST YOURSELF!! This is something I so deeply struggle with on the LSAT. But if there are any fellow English majors out there, or any avid/good readers, trust yourself! I can't tell you how many times I've second-guessed myself and went with a very attractive and popular wrong answer instead. This has happened to me on BR, too (overthinking is definitely a thing on the LSAT), and on the real thing, where I change an originally correct answer to a wrong one. If you're a good reader (and you know if you are, so keep telling yourself that), I want to say your intuition is likely going to be correct. For me, like the metaphor JY uses, there was a "little spark" in my understanding that was correct, and that led me to choose the right answer, but my self-doubt and extraneous (to passage) anxious thoughts extinguishes those little blooming sparks under timed conditions.

Sometimes, you don't even have to waste time thinking through a lot of the answer choices to get to the right one. I think this especially applies to method and purpose questions (but definitely NOT parallel/analogy questions). This kind of goes with #1 and especially applies if you have a prephrase. This saves a LOT of time. You can always go through the wrong answer choices on BR and critique them and find what's wrong with them, but you probably won't have time on the real thing to do this for some questions.

When I first started using JY's methods of low to high res/memory method, I struggled a bit and saw my score drop, mostly because a lot of the times I was thinking, "are you kidding? I can read. I'm an English major!" But I kept doing it (per some redditor's advice I think), started with writing out the low-reses during testing, and then eventually not having to write things down, just reviewing in my head what I read/what the author is saying after each paragraph. Another thing I found really helpful for me was to highlight the transition words, instead of sentences/things that are more related to substance. I had trouble with keeping up with both a substance- and structure-low-reses at the same time, so I found this method (highlighting transition words) to be very helpful. It eases up the amount of things you have to keep in your head, giving you visual cues just like the diagrams you draw in LG do.

Overall, the most important thing is to keep a positive mindset and keep affirming yourself with all that you are and all that you've accomplished in your LSAT journey so far! Don't let a stupid LSAT writer trick you into thinking you were wrong. I think it's a very delicate thing to know/figure out where you actually have no idea what the right answer is, versus where you do know or have an inkling. When it's the latter, go with your "intuition." (I put scare quotes around intuition because it's not really all intuition--you've read and understood the passage.)

If there are any scorers who do extremely well on RC, please give your two cents, too! I would love to hear what you think.

How can I properly drill my LR. Should I go up in difficulty as time goes on, or should I mix the difficulty up? Should I focus on one question type at a time, or should I again mix up the question types. When should I do full sections timed? For context, I have been studying for over a year now and have already taken the exam with LG games, Now trying one last time either September or October.

Most of us are taught to make inferences for game Rules, but perhaps we should all be more on guard to make inferences when interpreting Questions….

Example:

LSAT 62 – Section 3 – Game 2:

When I hit question 11, I was already mentally exhausted so I didn’t make the key inference that JY pointed out…. that there was 1 g and 2 rs. Then it occurred to me that a lot of seemingly “local” questions state things a less than obvious way – and it’s far more effective to look for inferences IN THE QUESTION.

Again, I'm thinking we can all improve on effectiveness in LG if we also look to draw inferences in SOME questions - at least ones like in the example - they appear local but still too broad at first...

Thoughts?

Last PT I took was 74 and got a 165. Missed 8 in RC. Need help with RC strategy. Taking LSAT in June.

I need help with trying to answer the questions that ask something along the lines of "Which of following could substitute the condition (insert rule here)"? I don't know how to approach these at all.

Example: PT M20.S2.Q11

On the original site, when I didn't like my performance on a certain drill or when I'd like to drill the same drill again, I would duplicate it. But this duplicating feature doesn't seem to show up in the new site. Will it contain this

I've loved this course so far! However, one thing I struggle with more than anything is diagramming the Logic Games. For me, this is the hardest part of the section and I have lesser confidence in this section than all the others. Time and space for drawing is a constriction that further messes with my confidence, although I do diagram each clue out. My biggest program after is combining the clues. Can you offer any tips or suggestions?

Are there 2 June Lsat flext test versions?

Anyone else taking it at the tourist nightmare hotel across from Penn Station?

Hi!

This is killing me! Why can JNOP be a correct answer just because we happened to pick J first? Okay, if J is the necessary then O and N can go in too and also because they are OR groups and so both can be in S okay. But then why can't be in S as well? This doesn't make any sense to me. NOJ are in because its an /N--> and /O-->J as an OR group. But its /K-->P as an OR group so why can't K be there too like N and O were?

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-34-section-4-game-2/

Hey everyone,

I am planning on taking the January 2024 LSAT. I have been studying for quite a while now, and am scoring in the range of 152-155. I recently just decided to purchase 7sage due to the overall positive results it has produced for students. I have been PT'ing using 7sage as well scoring within that range, however, I have been scoring between 166-168 on my blind reviews. Here are my averages for each section:

LG: -6/-7 (-1/0 BR)

LR: -9 (-5/-6 BR)

RC: -10 (-5/-6 BR)

One of my overarching issues is pacing. I can't seem to quite get to where I want to be given the time constraint. This usually forces me to skip a LG section, and forces me to miss a fair amount of questions on both RC and LR. Sometimes, depending of difficulty, I may skip a LG section while being about 50% on each answer for another.

From all of this, I would just like to know what I should do going forward with studying. Should I go through 7sage's modules and work each section out? I work about 30 hours per week, and since my graduate classes are completed for the semester, that is really my only obligation as of now. My goal score is to get around a 160. Thank you so much!

Does anyone know if applying early binding decision to chicago will greatly decrease the potential financial aid I get? That is basically the only reason I am considering not doing it. Would love insights!