Figured out

I've been going through my prep tests, and I get absolutely destroyed by those final questions. Up to that point I'm usually between -0 to -3. What's a useful strategy?

Hi guys, I am wondering if there is a study group in DC for September 2017.

Hey guys,

The LawHub isn't opening and my test is tomorrow. What do I do?

#help

Hey everyone, I just completed the advanced logic lesson. Most of it made sense, until embedded conditionals.... Reviewing the intro to logic section. 7Sage said they are very rare but very hard.

I am just curious, how hung up should I get on the embedded conditionals stuff ? I suppose as it is the hardest logic lesson I shouldn't be so down about not having it stick after only a day or two of reading the advanced section. But that being said. I have watched the advanced logic section a couple times now, at this point I feel like I am just wasting time ! I am not trying to sound pompous but thus far nothing has ever really made me feel this stupid before and it has me questioning my whole study study plan.

Should I just forge ahead and hopefully this stuff will click with more time and practice/following more along the core curriculum ? In all honesty I am only shooting for a mid 150 range score, Is embedded conditionals worth stressing over ?

Other then that, If anyone has any advice or extra material on this stuff I am all ears. Thanks !

Is E the right answer because it is the only choice that addresses jurisdictions that have mandatory headlight usage? Thanks.

Hi everyone!

I'm having a hard time with parallel method of reasoning questions. I know that I have to find the method in the stimulus and find the answer choice that uses the same method. Any tips?

Thanks in advance,

Amy

LR has been one of the hardest sections for me to get a solid understanding of. I went back through the CC and redid all the lessons on conditional logic and it helped immensely. Since then, I have been going back through the different question types in the order of the CC syllabus. I have printed out problem sets by question type from PTs1-35. I do try to add variety to my problem sets. For example, I'll do 10 strengthening, 10 MBT, 10 SA , 5 SA, and 5 MSS on one day. I have been doing all these problem sets untimed. I will spend as much time as needed to answer the question. Once I am 100% confident, I will go ahead and check the answer. If I get it wrong, I write out a detailed response on why I got it incorrect. I have found that my accuracy and speed have started to get better with 1,2, and 3 star questions. However, the 4 and 5 star questions take me a long time. I can spend upward of ten minutes on a single 4/5 star question. I have found that the language of the stimulus for a 4/5 question is incredibly convoluted. At this stage, should I drill 4/5 star questions? How do you get better with these harder questions? For those who have done untimed drills, at what point did you start to incorporate time? Finally, how would do you determine whether or not you're ready to drill full LR sections?

Thanks in advance!

Doesn't [D] just strengthen the premise that scholars are more likely to study successful businesses than unsuccessful businesses? Can someone explain to me why it's right? It doesn't seem to strengthen the support that being more likely to study successful businesses -> overestimating successes of past businesses.

I chose [E] because it seemed to directly relate to the support. Just because scholar are more likely to study successful businesses doesn't mean that they're overestimating the successes of past businesses... what if they're also including setbacks that those successful businesses had along the way? [E] seems to guard against this potential weakness by saying that historical records actually don't allow historians to infer those setbacks. Why is [E] wrong?!

Hello!

Could some explain to me why C is correct and how they arrived to the answer? Would also appreciate it if you could tell me why the other answer choices, especially D (which is what I chose), are incorrect! Thank you so much.

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

Anyone have some tips on LR ? Would love to have a zoom call with someone who's strong on LR and maybe teach me a different approach? I read the powerbooks .. use Khan.. have Kaplan tutoring coming up.... Sometimes I learn better from peers.

Okay, Im having so much trouble trying to fund out what goes into the sufficient or the necessary conditions. Specifically in group 3 and 4. I feel like I get it wrong every time. Can anyone direct me to a specific lesson in the syllabus or explain to me how to better distinguish what goes in the sufficient or the necessary.

Hi, I’m new to 7sage and was wondering if there is a PDF with the group 1-4 keywords when we start talking about logic.

My PT scores are around 166-173 and just got a 16mid score in April, aim 173+ in June. Hope to find someone to discuss PTs especially RC/LR section together, also we can oversee each other's study schedules. Please DM me or reply if interested!

RC is by far my worst section-- and the most inconsistent which worries me. I can go from -3 to -8 between preptests.

I find that on preptests I get a lot of inference questions wrong. I'm usually able to eliminate the obvious wrong AC fairly quickly BUT I ALWAYS select the trap AC.

I was wondering how other people tackle these problems and if anyone else has similar problems with inference questions!

Now that you can use mechanical pencils on the LSAT Flex, I thought I would give some advice here as someone that is a self proclaimed mechanical pencil nerd. I have used many in practicing for the LSAT and have to give my #1 recommendation to the Delguard ER . It is 0.5 MM and has a mechanism that prevents the lead from breaking (up to three clicks). It has saved me all kinds of time and frustration. The Delguard ER is great for smaller hands, and the regular non ER model is still great, but thinner. All around it's a great pencil. The eraser is OKAY, so I would recommend a mono black foam stick eraser, but that's your personal preference.

just ran into an answer that entailed a baby preferring certain colors with no indication in the passage that it has any preference.

Can it really? How do we know?

Another example i've found is that one must PREFER an easier/more efficient task over a more difficult one! But why always??

In a broader sense, i've encountered a few situations in which the word "preferred" appears in answer choices, and i cant help but feel that the use of "preferred" is a sneaky attempt to get me to make an over-assumption!

Maybe it's just me, but anyways, I need to stop psyching myself out.

I am scoring about 4/5 points lower then goal score, but on those PT I am getting -5/-6 LG . This is my best section and I am usually lower then that but lately have been higher and not sure why. I know I can go -0 or MAX -2, but not doing it recently. When I BR I just shake my head because I fix the couple little mistakes so quick and wonder how I even ended up at that AC timed. I have full proofing all LG from 1-35 now so maybe it's because I have been doing too many games ?? not really sure and looking for advise to tweak up LG before test. Thank you!

I am coming up on my October LSAT, and my RC scores have started to slip. I'm not quite sure how to tackle this! I think the PTs in the 70s and 80s are turning up the heat a bit with the questions, but I'm wondering if anyone has any tips for reviewing my tests, remembering details, etc...I am watching the question explanations for the questions I'm missing, but it doesn't seem to be making a difference.

I so, so, so appreciate any advice that you can offer!!!

Really confused by the extent to which we rely on diagram in this question. For PF questions, when is the case that we do not strictly follow the diagram in the stimulus? https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-44-section-2-question-22/

STIMULUS:

H–>/G

——-

H /G (confirm one theory at the expense of the other)

However, AC E:

D–>/J

——–

/D–>J (either or)

If the above is true, why is AC E is still the correct AC? Or in this case, are we choosing the best AC?

Let me preface this by saying I know I should be using official questions, but I bought this book in a rush for a trip where I wouldn't have great internet (powerscore books haven't arrived yet). My thoughts on the question at the bottom so as to not influence anyone before reading.

Despite five consecutive years in which global consumption of grain has been greater than global production, it is unlikely that the world is facing a near-term crisis in the food supply. The average shortfalls have been mainly due to reduced output from farms in China, which is moving from a policy of central control over agricultural production to a more market-driven model. Therefore, if demand for grain continues to fall short of supply, Chinese production of grain should increase dramatically. Which one of the following principles most helps to justify this reasoning?

A. Global markets respond more slowly than regional markets, so local rates of production usually change more rapidly than the global average.

B. When agricultural production is centrally controlled, it is unable to respond to changing demand by adjusting rates of supply.

C. Average shortfalls are most readily remedied by local increases in production.

D. When agricultural production is market-driven, it is likely to respond to rising demand by increasing production.

E. Centrally controlled agricultural production has been shown to be more inefficient than market-driven models.

.

Answer/Explanation below.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Explanation:

Correct Answer: D

When agricultural production is market-driven, it is likely to respond to rising demand by increasing production.

The speaker concludes that Chinese production will rise if demand requires it based on the premise that Chinese production is now market-driven. Clearly the author connects market-driven methods with matching supply and demand. Choice A isn't right because it isn't actually about the difference between global and regional markets but about China's transformation to a market economy. Choice B doesn't justify the conclusion but explains how things worked under China's older system. Choice C is wrong because the speaker isn't talking about local production. Choice D looks like the right answer. The speaker bases his conclusion on the principle that a market economy will respond to increased demand with increased production. Choice E isn't right. The speaker doesn't mention inefficiency or even compare a market-driven system to a centrally regulated one; he's only interested in the effects of China's transition between the two. Choice D is the best answer.

I think they swapped the words supply and demand in the conclusion and that it should read "Therefore, if supply for grain continues to fall short of demand, Chinese production of grain should increase dramatically." I know questions don't have to reflect reality, but this isn't even internally consistent. Continues should refer to the situation presented in the first sentence, but the first sentence clearly says that consumption (demand) is greater than production (supply). And the first line of the explanation also clearly says "The speaker concludes that Chinese production will rise if demand requires it", and demand would only require it if demand were greater than supply.

Thoughts?

Really confused by the extent to which we rely on diagram in this question. For PF questions, when is the case that we do not strictly follow the diagram in the stimulus? https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-44-section-2-question-22/

STIMULUS:

H–>/G

——-

H /G (confirm one theory at the expense of the other)

However, AC E:

D–>/J

——–

/D–>J (either or)

If the above is true, why is AC E is still the correct AC? Or in this case, are we choosing the best AC?

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.

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.

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/