Hello, could anyone provide an explanation for general theory? I have seen it pop up several times in MoR question and in other questions as well. I know its a principle that is know in the world like "everyone should eat healthy" but cannot come up with one that does not include should. Anyone have a better understanding of it?

Hey all!

I am pretty sure I understand what JY means but I have never encountered a question where it is okay to independently strengthen a hypothesis without strengthening the support between premises and conclusion.

In JY's explanation for PT 89.S2.Q3 he talks about the question stem and mentions how some (rare) strengthening Q's will say "what most strengthens the hypothesis" (as oppose to "what most strengthens the support between for the hypothesis",) in which case, he says it is okay to pick an answer that doesn't necessarily make the premises more relevant but could be something random that just makes the hypothesis more likely to be true.

I was wondering if anyone knows of any examples of a question like this from a PT? I would like to see it just to ensure my understanding is clear.

Thanks so much and good luck to everyone taking the Jan-Flex!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-89-section-2-question-03/

Taking all suggestions before the January LSAT!

How is D correct?????

I am very confused about this question and why E is the correct answer. i did not notice anything in the stimulus that alluded to the mussels retaining that hazardous waste. thanks in advance to anyone who can explain!

I thought this question was rather difficult but there is no explanation video, so just dropping my thought process/notes here. Please feel free to share yours!

P says ok eventually all mental stuffs can be explained in neurological terms

Explain mental stuffs in neuro terms -> knowledge (neurons and function, interaction, delineation of psycho faculties).

A. It supports the physicalist actually by trying to prove they are right.

B. It does describe

C. Not really, it didn’t use the 2 interchangeably

D. Why do we care about the purpose of this

E. Hmh that’s true, it talks about knowledge (which there are 3 but it only touches on 2).

Hi,

I received my September LSAT, and would love to go over the test with someone else who has also taken it via video chat. Are there any rules against this? I understand that you cannot sell or distribute the test, but I was not sure about this. If there are no rules against it, does anyone want to go over the test who will be taking it again? I would particularly like to talk about LG.

Thanks,

Lauren

I took a diagnostic a few weeks ago but haven’t taken any full PTs since then. Right now, I’m only partially through the curriculum, I’ve made some progress in the Logical Reasoning section but haven’t touched Reading Comp yet.

I’m tempted to start taking full-length practice tests to begin building endurance and test-day skills, but I’m also worried it might be too early. I don’t want to waste time on PTs if I’d be better off continuing through the lessons first.

When should I start taking full PTs?

Dear friends,

I just missed your group study on Jan 8th. Here is one question I don't know why C is the best answer to Q13.

As the two sentences are responses from Bordwell in proving musicals still fit into his theory, he mentioned that first musicals are derived from live theater, second, a structure from other genre makes viewers prepare for and thus accept them realistic. The author then attack him that "pigeonholing genres" is not necessary for viewers in watching films. So that is choice C is another way saying that "pigeonholing genres" is unnecessary? Thank you for helping me out.

Admin note: edited title

I'm still not clear on the contrapositive since there can never be a scenario where there is no table, according to the rules (Irene buys 4 items), whether the footstool or vanity is in or out. If this contrapositive is a true expression, is it not indicating that there IS a scenario where there is no table AND no footstool? Am I thinking about it wrong?

Contrapositives have always made sense and worked for me in many other questions, except this one. This is why I tried including a conjunction with the X (wood), because I was trying to figure out how to keep the existence of a table apart and separate from the existence of a table made from a particular wood (almost as if it were a 6th furniture option), but couldn't figure it out. I truly hope my question makes sense.

On this question I initially answered correctly, but then during BR changed to the wrong answer. I am beginning to understand why C is correct, but I still feel like I am not even 100% sure what the stimulus itself is actually saying.

Here is the stimulus:

The energy an animal must expend to move uphill is proportional to its body weight, whereas the animal's energy output available to perform this task is proportional to its surface area. This is the reason that small animals, such as squirrels, can run up a tree trunk almost as fast as they can move on level ground, whereas large animals tend to slow down when they are moving uphill.

What's throwing me off is that I don't understand how "energy output available to perform this task" differs from "energy an animal must expend." I was also a little confused by the jump from talking about energy to speed (saying that this is why squirrels can run up a trunk at the same speed)- am I meant to interpret that as saying that it uses the same amount of energy? If so, is that in relation to energy output available or the amount that must be expended and how would I know that?

Thanks for any help in advance!

Hi guys,

It's yo boy, coming here on the forums to type up some help for LR.

I was doing the LR, and then I discovered that I suck at one thing.

That one thing is literally that I seem to always miss around -3-4, no matter what. BR is around -0--2.

How do I refine my mistakes?

The questions I miss nowadays are usually strengthen, weaken, and passages with abstract wording/abstractly worded answer choices. (Usually, the questions I miss are the most "difficult" ones that many other people seem to miss.)

Anyone got any advice?

I'm taking September so I ultra-appreciate it.

Hi, friends. I had a lot of trouble understanding the clay tablets passage in PT 74 and I'm wondering if anyone can think of or dig up any similar passages. It seems straight-up descriptive to me, like a history lesson, rather than posing a position or a hypothesis or theory. It only helps so much to reflect on this one example. Anyone?

I was hoping someone can help me clarify this. So, I just bought the score preview option and i was under the impression that i just had to do it before my test release date (feb 3). But, after seeing that it allowed me to purchase it i just checked lsac website and it says the deadline to purchase score preview was yesterday. Im just wondering why it would process my order . was it a glitch ? or am i really signed up for it ?

I'm reviewing RRE LR questions. I came across PrepTest February 1997 Section 1 Question 23 (the one about the professor's travel plans) in a drill. Even after blind review, I got it wrong. I know the right answer, but I don't know why it's right or why the other ones are wrong. Can someone explain it to me? I'm not sure where to even start with this one.

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

Hey everyone

I am looking for an Active LSAT Discord Server. I am prepping to take the LSAT June 2023. I am also looking for partners to study with preferably once a week. I am a non traditional student who works full time but my schedule is different everyday so I have some flexibility. This will not be my first time taking the LSAT. Looking to score in the 165 range!

One of the ways that I study for reading comp is downloading scholarly articles off of my university's database. I was wondering if there was any way that I could upload those documents to 7sage's digital tester, or if I could even download the digital tester as an app or toolbar of some sort so I can mark up the articles similar to how I would for the actual test. Also, I am open to suggestions with note taking sites or apps that could serve a similar function and have a similar feel to the digital test. Thank you!

Anybody in the area that wants to do some last min studying for this February lsat

I am really confused as to why A is correct.

I saw this question as a RRE Q (Resolve, reconcile, explain). Here we have all people of this country approving legislation requiring that certain hazardous wastes be disposed of by being burnt in modern-high temperature incinerators. But there is push back (not getting the building permits) from every Gradaran community that the waste disposal plans to build these incinerators.

I took this as they are trying ot build the incinerators and the push back has to be due to something that the incinerators do. Maybe like pollution. So I am just unsure how A is correct.

#help.

I choose answer C but I realized that it says nothing about it and the only answer really thats discussed in part from the passage is the answer E. Curious to hear your thoughts.

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

I answered (C): I thought this would be right because it was the statement that was most backed up by what is in the stimulus.

The right answer is (E):I was battling between C and E, but I didn't pick E because it seemed like a statement although true, the stimulus was not supporting it directly.

Can someone explain why E is correct and why C is wrong? I feel like I am overthinking this.

Admin note: Edited title and post; please use the format of "PT#.S#.Q# - [brief description]." Also, please review the Forum rules "Do not post LSAT questions", the title format helps others reference the PT and question. Thanks!

Listen and subscribe:

Apple Podcasts | Spotify

Unlock the secret to acing both Logical Reasoning and Reading Comprehension! Many test-takers treat these as separate challenges, but the truth is, they're deeply connected. On this episode, we explore why the biggest hurdle in LR often isn't the logic itself, but actually understanding what you read. Plus, we'll show you how to see RC passages as extended LR questions. Ready to transform your approach? Listen in!

For the October 2019 LSAT, I was put on a waitlist. I know in the past, LSAC was almost always able to get folks off the waitlist and into a test center within a 100 mile radius. But now with the switch to digital, it seems like they might not be able to because they need more tablets vs. just printing more tests like they could do in the past.

I have called LSAC a couple of times and it seems like they are also scrambling and are not able to give any guarantees at this time. Has anyone heard anything?

Hi All,

The last sentence of the paragraph 2 reads: '...they argue that as the quality of black schools improved relative to that of white schools....'

J.Y. explains that from this, we cannot infer whether the quality of white schools remained the same, improved, and decreased. I understand this, but am wondering what the different interpretations of the sentence would be in the 3 scenarios.

What I think (assigning numbers as indicators of 'quality'):

Say the white schools originally were 10, black schools 5.

(1) In the case that white schools improved to 15, the net increase in quality for them would be 5. Therefore, whatever increase in quality of the black schools would have to be greater than +5, whether it be 11 or 12 (must be at minimum 11)

(2) In the case that white schools remained the same, then black schools can increase in any amount (but given the context of the passage, unlikely that it would supersede that of the white schools' original, 10)

(3) In the case that white schools decreased, say to 8 (so -2), black schools can increase in any amount, say 1, because that is still a greater than a -2.

Before J.Y.'s explanation, what I thought (1) would be meant if white schools improved to 15 (+5), black schools would also increase by +5 to 10. If this were the case, would the sentence have read: '...they argue that as the quality of black schools improved in parallel to that of white schools....'?

Please let me know what you think!

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-15-section-1-passage-4-passage/

Stimulus says: Manners are necessarily social (i.e. manners require a social element). Morals are not necessarily social (i.e. morals do not require a social element). Rules of etiquette do not apply to situations with morals or manners alone.

Things I noted upon reading:

Most strongly supported?

A: You can be immoral without causing harm. (i.e. you can not be moral in a case that is not social). Yep, this fits with #3 above.

B: An immoral act is never a violation of etiquette. This could be false if the situation also involved manners, so we can´t say it is supported.

C: Morality applies only when one is alone. I think you´d only choose this if you were hella confused.

D.: It is more important... I stopped reading right there and knew this was wrong. There is no comparison being made in the stimulus.

E: A social situation will never have anything to do with morality. Clearly wrong based on #2 and #3 described above.

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