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

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

I have been doing really well on the first 60-65 questions of my practice tests, getting very few wrong, but it is in the last dozen or so questions on the final LR section of the tests where I am getting a majority of my questions wrong. I am aware that the test gradually gets harder throughout the section, but I am unsure why I am struggling so much with this part because I get most of the harder ones right when I drill. Should I be practicing harder drills? If anyone has advice on this problem, let me know.

For statements with if and only if, does it matter which variable I write first?

Example: V is selected if and only if P is selected

the if and only if here is referring to P so the solutions in the book show

P (--) V

not V (--) not P

but if I wrote it out as

V (--) P

not P (--) not V

Would that be correct since this is a biconditional statement? if past would make P sufficient condition and the only if part would make P the necessary condition. Am I thinking of this correctly?

Also, can I think of biconditionals as implying that the two variable must always go together meaning that PV will always be together in the "in" group or in the "out" group. There is never a possibilities where one variable is in and the other is out. So, I could show them as a block in my diagram.

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?

For those who want to come- Prep Test 83 BR call on Thursday evening for the first LR at 7:00 pm Eastern and also 7:00 pm Eastern on Friday for the second LR. This will be a collaborative style BR. Please take the test or sections and do your own BR first but don’t score the section. We would like to have a good discussion and hear different perspectives/ reasoning which is most effective when people don’t know the answers.

We will meet via Zoom. Here is the link: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/7769566542

Hey! I have been studying for a few months with my test in October. Lately I have been super focused on getting the LR wrong answers down. I average at -6 with my lowest -3. I usually have 2-3 minutes left to go over my flagged questions, so I do not think timing is the issue. I only get 5 star, sometimes 4 star, questions wrong. What is the best strategy I can use this next month to get my wrong answers down?

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.

Pretty much what the title says. My main issue is with LR. I used to be able to score 18/25. Then I hit a couple highs of 20/25 and was very, very happy. A week before, I started getting 16/15/14 out of 25, a pretty big dip. Took the Sept test, then about a week break. Did a section drill yesterday, got a 13/25. Is my brain broken? Was it too much to hope for a linear increase? For reference, I work full time, so MTWRF I study 4 hours daily: I wake up an hour before work to study, the hour of my lunch break, and 2 hours when I get home. The weekends are about 8-10 hour days for me. Is it too much to hope for a 160 by Oct?

Send Help.

Looking for an accountability partner to do 1 RC passage daily. We’ll do it separately and then check answers together. Please message me if you’re seriously interested!

Having trouble identifying how assumptions play a role in LR stim's. I keep hearing 'inferences' and 'assumptions', pseudo-sufficient, sufficient, necessary in the content, but I am having trouble distinguishing the authors' vs my own assumptions (reasonably) to ID the correct answer choice. How do you go about ID'ing those inferences and/or assumptions to evaluate an argument's strength?? Any clarity is major appreciated!!!

Taking all suggestions before the January LSAT!

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?

Can someone show how to quickly translate/diagram this to make sense in the test? I was between B and C and chose c which is wrong. #help

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

Hello!

Does anyone have any tips on how to get better at answering the questions on reading comp?

Does anyone else find themselves mistakenly solving flaw questions as weaken questions when considering certain answer choices?

What I will find myself doing when evaluating certain answer choices is saying to myself, "Well if this were true, it wouldn't necessary weaken the argument, so it isn't the flaw of the argument"

I think this is incorrect because the best method for answering those two question types are different, but I don't actually know on a deeper level why the two methods don't sometimes overlap. Or maybe they do and I'm not always wrong in doing that.

Instead, I just accept that that is the wrong way to go about answering the question and try to catch myself when I do it and revert back to the correct method to answering a flaw question.

I know this is a bit abstract, but if someone could help explain more clearly why those two methods don't overlap sometimes when considering certain answer choices that would be helpful.

Hi all!

I had a question on answer choice E with this one. To me, the reasoning of flaw in answer choice E was the same as that of answer choice D of the same PT same section question 20.

Looking at the explanation of question 20 (Morton: In order to succeed (...)) in other forums on answer choice D, the explanations state that Morton actually DOES consider the counterexamples stated by the skeptics (which is why D is incorrect); the problem was that he just did it through a flawed way. The structure of this passage was:

So, in actuality, this argument DOES consider the skeptics counterexamples.

Now coming back to question 22, in my line of thinking, the author of the passage does the exact same thing as that of question 20.

So, in line with the thinking of question 20, I thought that the author DOES in fact consider that it can be the real reason; its just that he supports it though a flawed way. Yet answer choice E (Does not examine the possibility (...)) goes against the line of reasoning of answer choice D in question 20....

Thanks in advance!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-17-section-3-question-22/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-17-section-3-question-20/

How can you say what accounts for the best possible ice cream? Doesnt this stray too far from the passage? #help

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

I'm confused with definition and/or terminology. Is numbered ordering the same as basic linear ordering (with a number line), or is there a difference? [3D numbered ordering and Advanced Linear ordering]

Also is there any relationship between numbered ordering and relative ordering.

Please help. Thank you.

Anyone in the Houston area taking the LSAT in December? Send me a private post so we form a study group if youre interested!

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DMGpofJgfvP/

I can no longer un-see sufficiency/necessity....

Hello all,

I was reviewing PT 77 S2 Q18 (link below) and was having a bit of trouble clarifying my thinking on it.

If an argument "fails to exclude" X, that means it does not explicitly rule out X, correct? This is different than "presumes" or "takes for granted" X where X would be an assumption the argument makes, right?

Am I thinking about this correctly?

Thanks for any help!

Link:

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-77-section-2-question-18/

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