.

Does anyone have any tips on studying LR? It’s the section I struggle the most on and I’m not sure if I’m studying right or what but I haven’t seen much improvement in weeks. All suggestions are greatly appreciated!!

I am not 100% on my understanding for why the answer is C. I selected B and the others were obvious to me. Could someone help explain or break it down for me? Thank you!

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-64-section-4-passage-3-passage

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-64-section-4-passage-3-questions

Hi guys,

just wondering if anyone else is in the same boat as me (waiting for the Feb 2021 results) even though scores should have been released on March 10th.

I had to redo my writing portion due to a "security issue" which was submitted on March 9th. As of now, it says result pending.

Hi,

I'm really struggling with author's inference questions in RC. Does anyone remember if a specific lesson covered this? Or if anyone has a helpful approach, I would be so grateful :)

Hey everyone, I was wondering how often the LSAT does weird misc games, like the subway line one on prep test 18. I'm trying to budget the remaining time I have before the August LSAT and I want to know how much priority I should give them. Are they common on the newer LSATS?

Thanks!

Hi all,

For LR, does anyone have any tips on how to flag questions to go back to during time? I usually finish my first sweep of the questions w/ 10 to 12 minutes on the clock, flagging questions along the way. However, when I finish BR, there's always a few questions that I got wrong and didn't go back to (either in time or in BR). It seems like a case of not knowing what I don't know. I also worry that I'm wasting time on some of the questions that I flag but ultimately got right on my first pass through.

Hello, I'm struggling with understanding Hybrid games. I have a solid foundation on ordering and grouping but for some reason hybrid is tough. Are there any tutors that specialize in Hybrid games?

Good Afternoon,

As I am starting my Reading Comprehension Curriculum, I would like to see if you guys have any tips or have any advice ASIDE from what JY explains at the beginning of the section. Feel like it could be super beneficial to hear from someone who has made it through this section and explain what worked best for them.

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.

If this is not the hardest question on the set, I don't know which is. I had a great time trying to understand this question and why C is correct and spent an hour just scratching my head trying to figure it out. Would still love to see what everyone thinks about this question. But so far I don't see that many asking about this question so here is my take on it.

Background: Some researchers claim that people gesture less when expressing abstract instead of physical ideas

Premise: Some people perceive words in different ways: for a word that has both abstract and physical understanding, people can perceive it as either abstract or physical

Conclusion: The argument that the researchers' claim is not universal is not sufficient reason to reject it.

WTF. What are the connections between the premise and the conclusion? It seems to me that the premise is trying to say that the researchers' claim MIGHT WELL BE universal.

The argument implies that the critics would challenge the researchers' claim by doubting its univsersality. It might be something like this: the word "comprehension" represents an abstract concept, but some people apparently gesture and make a grabbing movement when they say it. This is a disproving evidence that would show that this claim is not universal, therefore it can be rejected.

Author counters by saying: hey, "comprehension" doesn't have to mean the abstract concept of understanding. It can definitely mean "catching" or "grasping." Not so fast critics, the claim of the researchers can still be universal: people just understand a word differently, and their actions regarding gesturing when expressing different words or concepts are still in accordance with what the researchers have claimed. Just because someone does gesture when expressing a word that has an abstract definition does not mean that person are thinking of the abstract definition of that word. He or she might well be expressing the physical definition instead of the abstract one. In this line of reasoning, the researchers' claim still stand and still might be universal.

AC C matches this pretty well. The author is trying to use a psychological fact (people perceive words in different definition) to reconcile a general claim (researchers' 'people gesture less with abstract concepts'") with apparently disconfirming evidence (people do NOT always gesture less when expressing abstract concepts). I find this line of reasoning the most applicable to the right answer to this question. I might be dead wrong with this, and I would love to see what others have to say about this.

Does anyone know if you are retaking the Aug lsat on the 26th if your scores would be released at the same time as everyone else or will they be later?

#help

Thanks!

Hi everyone, I'm currently struggling with RC (mainly timing issues). I'm working with standard time and it's just not enough for me. When I'm practicing with a little extra time or just untimed, I tend to write out my low-res, view points and all that stuff and I ZOOM through the questions missing no more than 1 or 2 at the most on the passages. When timing constraints are on, my note taking is shit and I can't comprehend the text as much as I should be and I rush. Do I just need to slowly get rid of the physical note taking?

Hi everyone ! Is there anyone in the Boston area! I would love to create a study buddy group for those taking the June LSAT

I am having trouble deciphering between answer choices especially determining if an answer choice is too strong or too weak, Any suggestions on how I can improve?

Hey 7sage hive mind! I just finished the Strengthening Section of the CC and I struggled more than I have with any of the other question types thus far. For a lot of people it seems like after going through weakening, strengthening feels easy. I'm having the opposite issue... my entire weakening section went really well, but once I got into middle difficulty level, to harder questions on strengthening I feel like my accuracy plummeted. I'm hesitant to move on in the CC until I really understand this question type. Does any one have any thoughts as to why someone could excel with weakening but struggle with strengthening? I even tried negating answer choices to try and weaken the argument but I feel like it doesn't work for every question.

Thanks in advance!

Can anyone help me figure out what B is wrong? thank you!

Hello! I’m sitting for the November LSAT and currently working to finish Fool Proofing LGs from PTs 1-35.

Would it be the best use of my time to continue on this trajectory (mixed in with full PTs, of course) or would it be more astute to FP the LGs from the later PTs (50s-80s) that I am working on?

Thank you for your time and input!

P.S. I am also planning to sit for the January test.

Hi everyone, I'm looking for a study partner that is doing well on RC (-0-2) and wants to help someone that isn't! Message me if you are interested!

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?

While I have managed to reduce greatly my incorrect ACs in RC, it is still my poorest section. So far, my approach to studying for this section has been incredibly random. I have usually only found that repetition and completing many reading comprehension sections was the best remedy to improvement. If anyone has found a helpful approach to practicing and analyzing RC questions, please let me know!

Hi there. I received my Sept LSAT score (167) last night and scored substantially lower than my prep-tests (avg173). I knew walking out of the test that my score would be lower as I screwed up the timing on my RC section pretty substantially and ended up rushing through the last passage, barely reading and answering the questions. My top school is NYU -- I was planning on applying ED and for the RTK scholarship. I am going to retake in December, but this eliminates the opportunity to apply ED and for the RTK scholarship ( I think?).

I guess I'm wondering if there are any other options-- is there any point in applying ED with my Sept. LSAT score and allowing my December score to come in later? Or is it possible to apply to the RTK scholarship with a Dec LSAT score (the application is technically due Jan 1st. but Dec. LSAT score release date is Jan 4th).

Applying as early as possible is something that has been emphasized so much by advisors that I guess I'm feeling apprehensive about a December retake, but I am confident that I can raise my score by at least 3 pts.

Any Advice would be much appreciated.

Hi Guys, I postponed my test to Jan. Would like to find some study partners to join for some LSAT LR hard questions and detailed reading for hard RC passages.

Drilled all the 1-35, just started to drill 36 above. Please let me know if your pace is similar to me.

Aim for 168 in Jan. Now is at late 155-160.

I'm having a hard time understanding how the explanations for the right/wrong answers on these weakening questions don't contradict one another.

PT 86 S1 Q14

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-86-section-1-question-14/

PT29 S1 Q16

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-29-section-1-question-16/

In Q14, JY says (C) is incorrect because we don't know whether bats are included in the "most." Whether or not they are included establishes the relevance of this "most" claim -- you have to be included in the "most" otherwise we don't care. With this in mind, I initially eliminated answer (B) while doing Q16. But JY says (B) is the correct answer for Q16 because since some languages lack words for parts of their environment, it isn't surprising that Proto-Indo-European have no word for "sea." They could have still lived by the sea, making the premise less relevant. I'm confused for two reasons. First, we don't know if the Proto-Indo-European speakers are included in the "some," if they aren't included in this group then this claim becomes irrelevant. Second, the reason (B) is correct on Q16 seems in-line with the thought process I used when incorrectly picking (C) for Q14: if most animals normally rarely bite, then it isn't surprising that bats rarely bite. Rabid bats could still bite, making this premise less relevant. I can see why (B) is the best answer for Q16, but now I'm confused about why (C) is wrong for Q14. What am I missing?

Does anyone know where you can practice translating for English to logic for inference questions. For example a bunch of question stems for practice and we translate them to logic.