I am having a hard time between Option A and E.

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

Im drilling between preptests and I have been "drilling" but instead of doing new questions i focus on all the question types I have done in my previous preptests. Has anyone else done this before? Is it effective? or should I focus on material I havent seen before from earlier preptests? or both

Hi, is there any way to download practice test score reports with the new 7sage? I believe the classic 7sage allowed this but I'm not seeing the option to do so with the new one. Thank you.

I am trying to understand how to tackle reading comprehension blind review and practice drills for radical improvement. I do understand how the memory method is supposed to work as a process but I need to prioritize or do something. I find myself alternating with speed reading and not fully connecting referential phrasing dots to meet the 3 (mostly ends up being 4 1/2 minted still) then getting a poor understanding of the passage overall. Or reading for clarity as J.Y. does in explanation videos, trying to mimic real-time imagination strategies , then killing more time. Both resulting in about 10 to 13 minutes per passage. Which one do I prioritize? Should I focus on better reading then time will automatically fall in line with confidence? Or am I missing the point altogether? #help Pleaseee. Thank you in advance.

Hi all,

I would like to know how do you dissect the principles of the answer choices which has no conditional indicator or universal quantifier?

I've some trouble in correctly dissecting the principle behind answer choices A, B, and D, since none of them has a conditional indicator or universal quantifier. I understood they are wrong because none address the situation when parent should not encourage their children to outdo others. Here, my focus is solely on how to dissect the principles of the answer choices which has no conditional indicator or universal quantifier.

I had tried to interpret their principles as below:

A- If something can make their children happy about it that they do well, parents should encourage their children to do so.

B- If something can help their children have easily satisfied desires, parents should try to ensure their children do so.

D- If something can help their children have important achievements, parents should ensure their children do so.

But in my review, I felt I had pigeonholed these statements into conditional statements. So, perhaps, their principles are just assertion without premises, like "Human should be kind." Assuming such statements are all valid, they would imply that any subject mentioned should follow the prescribed advice irrespective of circumstances. Again, I am not sure whether this is the correct way to discern the principles of A, B, and D.

I am sorry for the long post. Any helps would be greatly appreciated! Thanks!

Leon

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-88-section-4-question-17/

1- Is it still a good idea to do the classic LG bundle (1-35) or should I mix some games from PT 50-60 into the bundle?

2- Also another question, while doing the LG bundle I will do the RC CC as well. After I am done with the RC but still in the process of doing the LG bundle, should I incorporate timed sections of LR and RC or just wait and do a full timed PT?

I am just in my week 2 of the cc and its super frustrating to basically BR every single example video only to get it wrong. So instead of focusing on the negative, I am trying to stay positive and understand that I am just starting out and there is more room for improvement. Does anyone have any uplifting stories that basically parallel being bad at the cc in the beginning but crushing it on the test date?

I get that we are concerned about comparing the people that fall outside the weight bracket and people that fall inside the weight bracket, but I am still confused about (D). From the data collected from policyholders, we make a generalization, which looks like a flaw to me. I thought (D) acts as a flaw/gap protector by increasing the likelihood that holders are proper representatives of the population.

Help is appreciated! Thank you in advance!

So I'm on the MSS lessons, and I didn't really do the drilling questions timed, i just did them and then went back and BR-ed them. Should I start doing the drills timed or is it better to take my time with them and save the "timed" part for the PTs?

I came across a rule I'm not used to diagramming in PT 85 Game 1, and was curious if any of you have come up with a clever shorthand. I ended up coming up with one on the spot, but I think it led me to make an otherwise avoidable mistake on what should have been a straightforward game.

There are at least two slots separating H and S, but H and S are interchangeable in order. (JY used H _ _ S with a small "LL2") symbol in a switching box, but he himself called it somewhat clumsy.) When I did this game the first time around, I ended up forgetting that 2 slots was a minimum and not exact. Perhaps there's a way to make this rule clearer in the diagram and less of an afterthought?

Another more general diagramming question, not from PT 85: Values are not consecutive. I've always represented consecutive as (AB) and nonconsecutive as (AB) but find this leaves something to be desired in terms of clarity. Any and all suggestions are much appreciated!

Want to make sure I'm thinking through this correctly. C is right because it suggests the incorrectness of a premise, that the reason that Peter's actions are more blameworthy than Alicia's. The relevant part of C is just that Peter's running a red light, an illegal action, caused the action that caught the police's attention. I'm struggling to figure out whether the part of C that says that Alicia took extra care to avoid police noticing her contradicts the premise that there's a diff in the blameworthiness. I would argue that it doesn't, but I want to ensure that I've nailed down the important part of the correct answer choice.

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

Hi, guys. Recently purchased the Ultimate+ and really am loving the wide range of problem sets available for improving. My question is this: if through my first run (in this case a MSS problem set) of a problem set I finish each question in good time with confidence, clarity, and correctness; is it worth my extra time to go back through this problem set immediately after with the videos and blind review, even if I felt 100% certain throughout? I'm making my way through the CC now.

Also want to say I love the camaraderie on 7sage. I'm very happy to be here. Writing in November for my first time!

Hey guys, I just started studying for the LG portion of the exam. I was wondering if you had any tips for learning what to look for in the answer choices. For example if the question stem asks, "All of the following could be true except . . . " JY, without skipping a beat, says okay we are looking for 1 Must be false and the 4 others could be true. Not the best example, but its the best I could come up with right now haha. Thank you in advance!

Necessary condition" Fear of retaliation --> Deter attack/military deterrence

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

So, JY says that we need to use timed BR when doing a section of LR, but what if i'm still going thru the CC and haven't gotten to the point of PTs yet? do i still time myself while doing the cluster of such as weakening questions? #help

Anyone else get messed up by this when they PT'd this test? I got owned pretty bad. Watched the video that J.y. put up though

So I am learning Logical reasoning through the book "The Loophole". So it says that "Your loophole and resolution have to be powerful" and "Your inference and controversy have to be provable" But then when I got to the Provable question stem section it said that the question stems-- conclusion, NA, Method, Argument part, The flaws-- all used loophole. Can someone please explain this? I don't understand.. because the book initially said that loopholes have to be powerful.

Hi, I'm new to studying so I'm having trouble with making an inference. The stimulus states that "none of the responses among terminal cancer patients to various therapeutic measures has been more positive than the response among those who consumed shark cartilage". The powerscore bible states that we can infer "(consuming) shark cartilage has received a more positive response than any other therapy". First, how would we diagram this or is it even diagrammable? Second, what fundamental is this testing? Is it logical opposites? Thanks in advance and happy new year!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-28-section-1-question-11/

I feel like soon as I can cement this I will be good! I'm challenged to properly identify whether one can pronounce 'X' or 'Y' of a given statement as a certain condition BECAUSE the logical indicator preceded it or not. Are there circumstances with rules for when it does not? I keep getting caught in the confusion between how to label what is before and after the logical indicator. And yes, I have gone through the lessons on this.

J.Y. can you assist with this #help

How’d it go for everyone? Personally, I was annoyed by the paper test after all of the digital prep I’ve done. I had two LG sections and I’m praying that the art gallery was experimental.

In parallel reasoning, the scope of the conclusion must be very similar. If the original argument has a "usually," then AC's conclusion must have a "most" or "usually" etc. Or if the conclusion is universal, "Bats are nocturnal," then the AC's conclusion must also be universal. (Right?)

In match the flaw, the scope of the conclusion is irrelevant.

Where in the stimulus do we find support for the fact that zebra mussels MUST be regarded as hazardous waste if they don't transform the waste products they filter and remove? Answer choices D and E seem really close here.

Admin Note: Please use the format "PT#.S#.Q# (G#) - brief description of question."

The "but" in the first section reveals the author's position on Midville: it is not as expensive as others perceive it to be. The following sentences provide support as to why they believe this is true.

I have been reading and hearing a lot that there are patterns to this. Can someone explain to me what that means? I can see how it relates to LG but confused on the patterns for LR.

An assumption I came up with was: "allowing eggs to decay makes it impossible to use them to analyze for pesticide-bird tests"

Would something along those lines be a viable answer for assumption questions?