Discussions

LSAT

New post

330 posts in the last 30 days

Hi! Recently started learning about formal logic and it's kicking my butt to be honest. I'm still a little confused on how you even identify a conditional statement (I was going through some of the exercises and was like seriously, this is a conditional statement?).

More importantly, I'm still a little confused about how to deduce sufficient vs necessary conditions. I don't want to rely solely on indicators as LSAT is a test about understanding. If you guys could share your tips/explain, I would appreciate that so much, thanks!!

0

I'm doing some LR drilling right now, and I just wanted to make a discussion post and share my reasoning for a question (as prompted by 7Sage).

C: the glacier that melted to reveal the ancient body is at least 4,000 years old

Reasoning: Artifacts found on the man's body indicate that he lived at least 4,000 years ago, and that he died on the same spot where his body was discovered. Therefore, the glacier - the spot on which he died and was discovered - must be at least 4,000 years old. None of the other answer choices were even close to enticing and were easily eliminated.

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

0

Hi there,

Is there a lesson as part of the CC where the process for approaching LR Evalutate questions is covered? If not is there a particular problem/ set of problems JY works through where he explains his strategy in detail?

Thanks yall

0

Free will is not applicable in determining responsibility for all situations (its not a one size fit all equation).

We hold criminals responsible bc they cause damage out of free will.

We do not hold drivers (driving while heart attack and cause damage) responsible, even though the heart attack could be prevented from diet (free will).

A. Itself is not a conclusion

BC. Not “Should”

D. Not true

E. Maybe, saying that we do not apply free will equally to all situations (i.e both criminals and drivers under heart attack both stem from free will but they have different outcome).

0

Hey all,

I had a question on Logic Games, specifically those questions that don't give any additional clue and require you to at least have to brute force a few of the question choices. (CBT, MBT questions)

When I watch the LG explanation videos, because JY does his explanation on a sketchpad, it's easy for him to draw the game board and erase the game pieces after he's done brute forcing one of the answer choices. I realized we can't do this, since our LG game boards are done on a scratch paper.

When you go through the answer choices, do you redraw the gameboard/game pieces for each of the answer choice, or do you have one game board and erase the game pieces after you've tried out the answer choice? Would love to get advice on how you do these questions!

0

This necessary assumption question discusses the treatment of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) with a newly developed drug. CFS is associated with three different symptoms, and we don’t know if these symptoms are the effects of only one virus or of multiple different ones. Tests of the new drug indicate that this drug lessens the severity of all three CFS symptoms. The stimulus takes this to provide evidence to the effect that CFS probably is caused by one single virus, not by multiple different ones.

Pre-phrase / anticipation: We need an assumption to the effect of ‘If a single treatment lessens all of a given syndrome’s symptoms, then it is more likely for this syndrome to be caused by a single virus than by multiple ones.’

The pertinent answer choices are (B) and (D). (B) states: “It is more likely that the new drug counteracts one virus than that it counteracts several viruses.” This matches the consequent in the anticipated assumption but leaves out its antecedent. (B) thus does not make the argument valid and would fall short of being a sufficient assumption. But is (B) necessary? If negated, (B) would indicate that it would be equally likely or even more likely that the new drug affected several viruses. This is not at all what the author is trying to argue and thus would seem to rob their conclusion of any support.

(D) states: “Most syndromes that are characterized by related symptoms are each caused by a single viral infection.” This in itself might be right, and arguably (D) would be a good strengthen answer choice. (D) gets at the conclusion and points out parallel cases where similar correlations have been observed as well. A number of things seem off though: (1) Do we know that the alleviated symptoms in fact are ‘related,’ as this answer choice suggests? We certainly know that they all are effects of one or more causes, but does that also render these effects related to one another? (2) The conclusion in the stimulus takes the results of the experiments with the new drug to provide evidence to the effect that CFS has a single cause, but (D) does not contain a connection to these experiments. Instead, (D) is just making a general claim that arguably strengthens the conclusion in isolation but that does not also connect it to the other parts of the argument.

As an NA answer choice, (B) thus seems better than (D). (B) is essentially saying: In probabilistic terms, the new drug’s acting on three different effects indicates that these three effects likely have a single cause rather than three different ones. By contrast, had the drug only affected two of CFS’s three symptoms, it would have been likely that there are at least two causes for CFS, one virus that triggers two of its symptoms and another virus that triggers the third one. (B) is thus hinting at a sort of appeal to simplicity behind the author's reasoning. The author seems to assume: If two different hypotheses about the causal relationships behind a given correlation are possible, the simpler hypothesis is more likely correct.

0

I had 3 LR(I’m unsure as to which we’re real) , 1 RC (the one with lies/mistakes) and 1LG(the one with the flowers)

I feel pretty strong about this test

0

Just curious, I've been doing cookie cutter review and was wondering if this was a pattern that anyone noticed in LR stimulus. For instance, the stimulus would talk about the effectiveness of a product, then it will have answer choice about probability or likelihood of something happening but it's a trap answer. Anyone want to share?

0

Hi everyone,

Just wanted to hear some tips on folks who are very comfortable with Reading Comp. I absolutely loved JYs breakdown and framework for science passage - phenomenon and hypothesis. I studied literature in college, so those science passages are daunting, but with that framework, pretty much every science passage can be broken down into that structure. It's like a swiss army knife to understand them. Love it.

Wanted to hear if you all had similar frameworks for Law / Human/ Arts passages? Particularly law. Those also seem daunting to me and I get overwhelmed by the specificity that many of the law passages tend to have under time pressure. Any type of larger frameworks in law that I can use as a swiss army knife (human / societal practice ---> law, problem existing --> law with answer ???)

Arts and Humanities are fine - my lit degree really comes in handy haha - but would also appreciate your tips in case I get a passage about Ayn Rand or something that I'm not inherently interested in (I hate Ayn Rand).

I usually do pretty well on RC, average 3/4 qs wrong. But sometimes I blow it and get 6-7 if it's a hard science or law passage. Want to be ready for the worst case scenario.

Thanks!

0

Hi everyone,

When I was taking the LSAT yesterday my eraser left a large purple mark on my scantron. I want to get my test hand-scored but also want to apply as soon as I get the correct score back. I saw on LSAC's website that I won't be able to request for my exam to be hand scored until the scores are released. Does anyone have any experience with the turn around time for handscoring?

0

I just worked through PT 44.4.20 and noticed the flaw traced to the lack of support between the premise and sub-conclusion. This is the first time I've encountered a question where the flaw hasn't been between the sub-conclusion and main conclusion. Is this common in other types of question, or does the LSAT usually focus on Sub-Conclusion to Main Conclusion flaws?

0

Before entering the PT's in the 80's, I used to blaze through the LR questions and would get -4/-5. Obviously, not perfect but a solid result.

But once I entered the 80's, my LR started dipping and I end up getting -7 to -9. I took a step back and tried to see what's going on.

I'm starting to find that a lot of the flaws and assumptions in LR in the 80's are still the same, but they are disguised with more convoluted language, both in the stimulus and in the answers. This has forced me to have to slow down now and really untangle the language in both the stimulus and answers now.

Is this something people have noticed or am I just going crazy? Lol.

I used to love blazing through the sections, but am wondering if I need to slow down now to attain accuracy on the more recent PT's.

0

Hey everyone, so I just got my January 2023 lsat score back and it's one point lower than my current highest score. I have taken the test 3 times very spread out over the years as I've navigated being a student/working throughout my studying. My highest current score is 156 (June 2021), and on my most recent test, I scored 155 (January 2023). Any advice would be so helpful as I really don't know what to do!! I really wish I had seen more progress over the years as I was practice testing in low-mid 160s prior to my January test. Should I cancel or is one point not worth a cancellation showing up on my record?

0

I guess the reason why its true is because its strengthening the reason to use sugar on the wound, best explained because of its dehydrating effect. I originally choose E but then switched it to A and got it right in a blind review.

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

0

Confirm action

Are you sure?