I was able to reach the right answer because I came up with a saying or mnemonic. I wrote down "because something is correlated doesn't mean 1 causes the other. And you can be at a higher level when you start w/ skills.

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of question”

At first, I chose B instead of D. I thought D was questioning their credibility and I didn't pick up on that in the passage and chose B, because I understood it to mean that it would be more risky to not believe the people who have more to lose. But then I realized, that it's not risky to the reader necessarily what the forecast states, so that can't be right. It never said their would be consequences for the person reading it if they listened to the wrong expert just that the experts were facing various levels of risk. Also, questioning whether you should trust someone based on who has more skin in the game is questioning their reliability of the person that takes less risk, so I can see why D is right and B is wrong now.

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of question”

Hi everyone! I have a 9-5 job, and do timed sections every day with review from 6:00 am to 8:20 am.

I’m new to 7Sage, and there are a variety of ways to study, but I’m not sure what the best way to study is. I’ve read the LSAT Trainer, and ran through LSAT Demon’s lessons on the LSAT but now since i’m on 7Sage, do I go through all the concepts regarding the lessons or do I continued to do timed sections with blind review and watch all the explanations and take notes? #help

I got stuck on this question between answer A and answer E. I went with A knowing that the 'every' in the answer would most likely be wrong. I almost selected E because it says 'they (men) fell short in all other categories' meaning men would have fallen short of fruits and vegetables like answer E says.

Can anyone give an example of how they solved this question so I can clear the smoke a little more in my thinking?

#help

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question"

Consider the following statement: A good apple is a ripe apple, and an apple will not be picked unless it is ripe.

We can come up with two diagrams here: 1) picked apple --> ripe apple 2) good apple --> ripe apple

I understand it is not possible to form a conditional chain in this case. However, is it possible to say: picked apple + good apple --> ripe apple?

I am asking this question because the answer to this question requires me to understand that we can say -ripe -> -good + - picked. Could you explain both statements using + to me? Thank you.

Sharing this on behalf of a fellow 7Sage user. Any help and answers would be incredibly appreciated! Thanks a bunch!

Hello! May someone give me advice on how to diagram a sentence that has both no and until in it? For example: No dog can go until their owners leave.

For the No, u would negate the necessary, but for the until, u negate the sufficient, so I am confused. Thank you!!

Hi all,

For logic games, I am constructing a game board for the conditionals and inferences just like JY does. My question is, for the questions, are you writing out new game boards and glancing at the conditionals? Let's say in a question they ask that if X person is placed on the 3rd spot, what could be true about where Y is placed, do you write over your original game board or write out a new one next to the question?

I usually select and copy the game board on my iPad next to the question, but I know I won't be able to do this when test day comes.

I'm trying to find the most time efficient way to do this. Thank you!

can you explain why this weaken question is incorrect? I chose answer C, but the correct answer is answer E

Can someone explain why the answer is correct. I understand that it’s right but I also could justify C as well.

So I've made significant improvements to my LR (which is a win in itself). My basic method for doing this was 1.Do 10 random questions. If any wrong, drill that type of question at least 30 times until I mastered it. For example, if I got 1 flaw question wrong from that origInal set of 10, I did 30 more flaw questions until I got them all down. While this took a ton of time, it got me from -6-8 to-1-3 pretty consistently.

My question is, how in the world do I drill RC? I can't seem to find a good way to improve. Does anyone have any recommendations? Is it from doing a bunch of untimed RC's? Only drilling certain questions? I can't seem to figure it out.

If anyone has any tips, I'm all ears.

Thanks!

I am about midway through logic games now and am hoping to finish the curriculum before August 1. I have no idea what to expect in terms of improvement. I am not a strong test taker and got a 151 on my diagnostic. I have been pretty serious about studying this summer and feel like I am grasping a lot of the material, and I am scheduled to take the test in September. I don't want to get my hopes up for my first practice test and expect some large jump in my score if that's unlikely. What experience have you all had in terms of your diagnostic score in comparison to the scores you got after completing the curriculum?

Hi! What are strategies for improving speed with logical reasoning? When I start timed sessions, I become anxious and often have to reread, but when I take my time I'm usually able to get the answer correct. Anyone else have this problem? Does this just go away after doing tons of practice questions? Thanks! #plshelp

Was stuck between A and C on this one. A was right to me because the author seemed to "presume" that a person wouldn't value their life more than freedom. Can anyone help break down why this was an incorrect way of thinking this through?

If it's an MBT question on Logic Games and you are trying to figure out which answer choice works in all the worlds you created… if it works for one sub-gameboard/ world does it automatically work for all?

Can someone go through this question and explain their thought process?

I think I was thrown off by this for two reasons. First, I was uncomfortable drawing the conclusion that Self Help books -> less visits and secondly, in the answer choices what "state of affairs" was referring to exactly?

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of question”

Say you swapped "fatalities" to "head injuries" in AC D, would this constitute a necessary assumption? My feeling is probably no because it was never mentioned how many injuries, proportionally, were prevented by the new laws for motorcycle helmets, only that some were prevented. Head injury was also never mentioned as the most common injury for motorcycle riders. Please let me know if I am wrong!

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of question”

Confused as to why the answer is C...

I thought the flaw of the argument was "just because its tested before it enters the market doesn't mean that its safe before you dump it into the river." None of the AC's matched my prephase, and I saw C as irrelevant.

I do not understand why B is correct.

Hello!

I'm wondering if there are any lessons on these specific RC question types?

(1) Inference

(2) Inference -Author's Perspective

(3) Recognition -What's Stated

Can someone explain what these question types are asking us to do, and if you have any tips on how to identify the right AC? Has anyone recognized any wrong AC patterns when it comes to these question types?

Thanks so much!

I am confused by this question. I selected A as the answer when drilling and during blind review. During blind review I was hesitant and wanted to select C (which is the correct answer). Clearly, I do not understand this question fully and I can sort of make sense of it on my own but would love insight and a clear explanation.

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of question”

Hi!

I was wondering,

How come we can use the same notation A -> notB to represent both cases of:

when in the first scenario, it means at least one of them, A/B has to be in the OUT group,

but for the second scenario, it means that it's either A in Group 1 and B in Group 2, or vice versa,

instead of A/B in Group 1 (or 2).

Basically, I would like to know why we can use the same notation for two scenarios that end up in different assignments.

Thanks in advance for your help!! :)

Can anyone explain why C is the correct answer here?

I believe (C) is correct because it is the contrastive of this argument: "For one to act Responsibly..." ---> "Act on the basis of information that one has made...."

So ultimately, because "Toril act on basis of information that...." ---> "Toril act act responsibly"

Just want to make sure I'm thinking about this correctly. Thanks!

[I am posting on behalf of a 7Sage user. Please feel free to leave your comments below. Thank you for your help!]

Why do I always perform better for the first LR section and worse off for the second LR?

Can anyone explain the lawgic behind this question?

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

Hello everyone,

2.5ish weeks ago I had been scoring high 160s and was ecstatic to finally break into the 170s on PT77, but then my scores for the next four PTs were were back to where they were before. Today, I just finished PT82 with my lowest score in weeks.

With the August test weeks away I had been optimistic, but have no idea what to do now. Maybe I'm burnt out (been doing 2 PTs/week recently), but it seems too late for a break. All tips/advice/encouragement are welcome.

Thank you.