Discussions

LSAT

New post

328 posts in the last 30 days

I originally picked C and didn't pick D - can someone confirm my rationale for why C is wrong and D is right?

C - Mentions that "very low" blood sugar levels could cancel out the high cholesterol levels, but the residents have normal blood sugar levels, so this is super irrelevant. Seems like LSAT is banking on fast and undetailed reading

D - If the residents have a genetic predisposition against vascular blockage, then that might explain why even with high cholesterol levels, they may have a counteracting force against the cholesterol levels

#help

0

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-27-section-4-question-07/

I've watched JY's explanation and the only other forum post regarding this question, but I'm still not sure why my reasoning for B is incorrect.

I understand the diagramming to be:

P: know a lot about history —> easy to impress intellectuals

C: /(know a lot about history) —> /(easy to impress intellectuals)

I also understand this to be a case of:

Invalid Argument Structure

A —> B

———

/A —> /B

What doesn't make sense to me is I chose B though because I'm thinking it's possible

(you could know a lot about history ---> /(easy to impress intellectuals)) or (A --> /B). I'm not sure if my reasoning is correct and it's just not appropriate in this situation because it fails step 2 of the flaw test or if something else about it is flat-out incorrect. Any feedback is appreciated. Thank you.

0

I chose AC C and didn't even know I was wrong until I did heavy review on the right AC D.

C. I initially thought "Yes the author would agree it is a predominant strength for the Mexican American writers to not be tied down by a literary establishment. It would follow reasonably that without the need to be accountable to a larger establishment the writers are more free to experiment."

The part where this is wrong is the 2nd half - "So are free to experiment..." Where is the support from the passage that the author believes the writers are more free to experiment in ways Mexican writers can't? There isn't any. In fact, where is the support that Mexican writers can't experiment??? This was an assumption I made - that if you are tied to a literary establishment, you won't be able to experiment. But in fact no such reference is made. All we know is that Mexican writing tends to be characterized by longer writing, more "cosmopolitanism," and more theoretical content. We don't know that Mexican writers are discouraged from being experimental.

My takeaways - 1. Where is "experimenting" mentioned? It's not, this should be a red flag if the AC mentions a theme / content that's not found in the passage. 2. It is a big assumption that to be tied to a literary establishment, even if the author thinks this is a bad thing, may not mean you're less able to experiment. What if in fact the establishment has been encouraging experimentation relentlessly to Mexican authors?

D. I was put off by "regional" writers; I didn't think the author believed Mexican American writers were regional at all! But this doesn't matter!!! We could exclude the Mexican American writers completely and the author would still have to agree with this AC.

The Mexico city literary establishment = "this community." They believe "regional" writing (dismissive tone) is "parochial" again a negative tone word. So in Mexico "this community" writes in a certain way and has control for who is successful and who isn't. If someone is writing "regional" and "parochial" content, is this going to win the award for best book in Mexico? No, because the establishment who runs the show doesn't value the regional and parochial content. They value something else.

0

I have heard people say that using the "and" and "but" strategy for weaken/strengthen questions really helps them arrive at the right answer. The strategy is basically that when you are asked to strengthen the argument, you say "and" at the beginning of each AC, and when you are asked to weaken the argument, you say "but" at the beginning of each AC. People say this has been a "life changing" strategy for them, but I'm still confused on how this helps people discern which answer is correct. If you use this strategy, could you please elaborate on how you use it (perhaps with an example)?

0
User Avatar
•

Tuesday, Apr 19, 2022

abriannaobare653

Review

Does anyone know how we are supposed to review the questions we got wrong on the LR sections of the preptests if it dosent show us the question after we have completed the test?

0

The question stem for this question asks us to pick an answer choice that shows that the explanation we were given in the stimulus is only a "partial one." I was doing this question as part of my weakening problem set. I read through the stimulus and was quickly able to identify my premise and conclusion:

P: Time runner's foot spends on the surface is less on a hard surface

C: Hard surface makes for greater running speed than a soft surface

I ended up choosing answer choice B, because I thought it provided us with an alternative explanation for why runners perform faster on the hard surface. In my mind, I thought the author was neglecting to acknowledge that it was actually the height of the runners that was affecting their performance rather than the hard surface.

If I were to add the following to answer choice B:

"when running on hard surfaces"---- would this make answer choice B correct? If not, why? Or would the stimulus have to make reference to the short v. tall runners?

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-30-section-2-question-09/

0

Am I the only person struggling to understand the explanation video? I find it very confusing. Per the explanation from the video, the passage excludes Spain from Europe but isn’t Europe still in Spain which would support answer A? The reason I could perhards see A as the answer is line 7-9 cites the origin of spanish-language proverbs while A says Mexican American proverbs. Besides that, I'm not getting the explanation that proved A wrong and I've watch the video 7 times.

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-64-section-4-passage-2-questions/

0

Hi, guys there are certain topics in logical reasoning that I would like to be more advanced in.

Those being:

Causation and Phenomenon-Hypothesis Questions

Some and Most Relationships

Can someone offer me additional videos, or what I can do to feel more confident in these lessons.

Please assist me in any way you can.

Best of luck to you all.

0

Hi everyone,

JY often says that it's a good idea to scan the question types in a LG before deciding whether to split: if there will be more gameboards than questions without additional premises, then it's best not to split; if there are more questions without additional premises than gameboards, it's worth splitting.

I understand that it would be easy to scan these on paper versions of the test, but I am wondering whether others do this on digital versions of the test? Do people click through the questions to see what type they are before diagramming? Is this time efficient on the digital version of the test?

Thanks!

0

I was thrown off by this one; even took a few times to read it before I realized what I did wrong. What I failed to recognize is that he seems to be assumed the reason for the complaints is the complainant's difference in political opinion; this has, in fact, not been demonstrated to be true.

0

Hi, I’m working on the 12 LR Drilling sections for MSS questions, and I could use some tips for Blind Review. A lot of what I have listened to makes me as if Blind Reviewing would be more effective when doing PTs. But what i’ve been doing so far is watching the explanation videos for questions I get wrong and then writing down why I get them wrong and why the right answer is right. But I still seem to miss a couple questions during each drill. Any tips?

0

To prepare for study abroad, exactly five students- M, N, P, R, and T- will learn at least one of four languages: French, Hindi, Italian, and Spanish. No student learns any other language. The following conditions apply:

No student learns all four languages.

At least two of the students learn French.

Any language that is learned by R is not learned by N.

If French is learned by any student, then that student learns Italian.

If Hindi is learned by any student, then that student learns Spanish.

P learns French.

5.) Which one of the following is a pair of languages that CANNOT both be learned by student R?

a. French and Italian

b. French and Spanish

c. Hindi and Italian

d. Italian and Spanish

e. Hindi and Spanish

Book says D. I say B and C are also possible. The only way those answers don't work is if R no longer has to learn the accompanying language with N still does. It DOES say pair which may mean the rules for him can be broken. If true, this is a thinly veiled modifier that I would probably have gotten wrong, possibly i just have to familiarize myself with this test more.

0

I have been struggling in the LR section, especially in the middle to end of the section. After question 14/15, I tend to get mostly all the questions wrong getting about -10 to -12 wrong in this section. I really hope to improve at this section by the NOV 2021 LSAT. If anyone is kind enough to tutor me for about 3-4 hours a week it would be greatly appreciated. I can compensate you for the hours! I am looking to score in the high 150s, at best a 160. My LG is my strongest section as I occasionally only get about -2 or -3 wrong. I have decided not to prepare as much for the RC with the limited time I have as I feel LG would be easier to improve in the coming weeks. I am looking to get down to -5 or -6 on the LR. Let me know if anyone is able to tutor!! It would be very much appreciated.

0

Y'all.

I just saw someone else post this on another discussion thread, but for any testtakers today or later this week, do NOT forget to click on “Ready to Check In” before (BEFORE!!!) your 10 minute break is up. Do not wait until that timer hits '0'!!

I'm sure everyone registered got this email from LSAC:

--

"Section 3 will not begin until the countdown clock expires. Test takers must click the “Ready to Check In” button before the intermission expires. Once this button is clicked, the test taker is taken to a waiting room. At this point, your proctor will resecure your testing environment so that you can go on to Section 3.

It is absolutely critical that you return to your computer and click the “Ready to Check In” button within the allotted 10 minutes.

If you fail to check in for Section 3 of the LSAT prior to the expiration of the 10-minute intermission, your testing session will be terminated and your score will be canceled. This cancellation will be recorded by LSAC as a Candidate Cancel and reported to any school to which you apply for admission that utilizes LSAC’s Credential Assembly Service (CAS) reports."

I checked in at the 1'20'' left mark. And don't worry, I still had to wait until the full 10 minutes were done, and my proctor was slow to return anyways. PLUS I had another extra minute just BEFORE Section 3 was due to begin. So no one's getting jipped if you 'check in' early.

--

⚠⚠⚠ Please, y'all... DO THIS. ⚠⚠⚠

0

So I've been noticing a trend lately where my RC score has been varying widely. Sometimes I'll score -4 and then the next day I'll score -10. Does anyone have any tips on how to fix this problem and become more consistent on RC?

0
User Avatar
•

Wednesday, Jul 29, 2020

blanksonjohn8703

PT64.S2.G3

With question 14, after I fulfill the condition of T testing G on the second day, why can't T test H on the second day as well? The rules tell us I can't have both Ts testing G (done). It doesn't say anything about a rider not testing on the 2nd day twice on different bicycles. Furthermore, what if I chose my set as "GFJH" instead of "FGHJ." Would I be violating any rule? It doesn't mention the bicycles being in order so why do I violate a rule if I decide to place T to test H on the second day. Thanks

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-64-section-2-game-3/

0

Hi,

Could someone please help me with interpreting "except" in this sentence?

In order to encourage personal responsibility in adults, society should not restrict the performance of any of the actions of adults or interfere with the likely results except to prevent negative effects on others.

This short premise is originally from PT 69 Section 2 Q15. The way JY interprets except in the sentence is that "if there is interference, then it is to prevent negative effects on others". I understand this logical transition. However, in the syllabus, doesn't he say that "except" is a bi-conditional indicator? So, will we use "except" as a bi-conditional indicator here to translate the logic?

Thank you for the help!!!! I sincerely appreciate any helpful comments.

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

0

I had originally chosen AC C because I didn't carefully read the "that is not based on coconut oil" portion, so now I can see how D is correct.

However, if C had said "Nondairy coffee lighteners made with coconut oil..." - would that have made it a strengthening AC? It seemed like the stimulus was trying to allude to the fact that maybe fat has a stronger impact on cholesterol levels than cholesterol themselves.

#help

0

Confirm action

Are you sure?