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/

Can someone explain what claim does AC E imply? Is "claim stated earlier" is subsidiary conclusion (1st sentence), or "since dog breeders try to maintain.....) Thank you!

Admin note: please use the format of "PT#.S#.Q# - [brief description]" for the discussion title

Looking for clarity re: the curve on this one. From what I can gather (from PowerScore podcast), the curve for April's LSAT is much tougher than how the PrepTests here have been curved.

Am I staring down the barrel of a lower score than all of my PTs?

I am a week into LSAT studying, about halfway through the “Causation and Phenomenon-Hypothesis Questions” section, and am wondering when I should start seeing close to 5/5 with BR on drills and quizzes? For the most part, I do well on the videos J.Y. goes over with us as part of the curriculum, but am being absolutely wrecked during drills, even with BR. I have months before taking my first official LSAT (June probably), but am curious whether I should be absolutely nailing these sections before moving on any further, or if I should continue through the syllabus as it will all fall together later on. Thanks in advance!

I really need help with answer choice A because it seems perfectly fine to me. Is this answer choice incorrect because the argument against internal relations in paragraph 4 stated that "to truly know an entity, we must know all of its relationships?" Is this not the same thing as "defining the entities of which the system is composed?" I thought they were the same thing because if scientists had to define each and every relationship the entities in the system had, wouldn't that mean all entities would have to ultimately be identified and that was why the author had an issue with internal relations? but if I am wrong, I would like to know. And is A supported by the passage even if it is the incorrect answer choice for this particular question?

And this is more of a general question but are organicism and internal relations two separate, but related concepts?

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-25-section-1-passage-4-questions/

Hey everyone!

In conditional-heavy games, when a question stem introduces a new temporary conditional, I have trouble linking this to the master chain, especially if it's already completed.

Anyone know any good video lessons or resources that could help me out with this?

Thanks!

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

does anyone have an explanation fot this question??

Admin note: edited title; please use the format of "PT#.S#.Q# - [first set of words]"

For this question, I was wondering why E is the wrong answer? Passage A and B endorse the same principles that lying is necessary in writing good narrative, but B says later they see it as unethical while A does not. Is it because the principle they are endorsing isn't exactly the same but applied to diff contexts (lying is necessary in historical vs. lying is necessary in autobiographical) and thus D is the right answer?

Is it recommended to try to redo the LR questions we got wrong a few weeks after so they are not fresh in our mind?

Questions or games(75.3 for example) that require you to manipulate a complete sequencing chain really slow me down. Does anybody have any tips or know of any games so I can drill them?.

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-75-section-4-game-3/

This question asks us to find an answer choice that matches the flaw in the stimulus.

The form of the argument in the stimulus and the form of the argument in the correct answer choice are not at all identical, and this is the difficulty of this question.

The argument in the stimulus says:

Stallworth claimed that [A]

A+B --> C

/C

Therefore, /B

A = Stallworth supported the proposal

A+B = Henning also supported the proposal (the "also" was referencing Stallworth's support)

C = proposal received government approval

Answer choice A says:

TV news claimed that [A and B]

A --> /B

Therefore, /B

A = the traffic accident occurred on Aylmer Street

B = Morgan witnessed the accident from his kitchen window

The TV news made two claims (claim A and claimB), then a not both rule (A --> /B) is stated. Since both A and B can't be true at the same time the author concludes that B must not have happened. However, the author is ignoring the possibility that it was A that didn't happen.

Answer choice B says:

City government claimed that [A]

A private institute claimed that [B]

Therefore, the city government is to blame for A

A = 15% of city residents are behind on their property taxes

B = property taxes in the city are higher than average

The flaw here is that the author assumes B caused A, rather than a number of alternative possibilities such as high unemployment or people being distracted by studying for the LSAT every day and forgetting to pay their property taxes. The other unwarranted assumption is that the city government sets the taxes. Maybe the citizens vote to determine the tax rate. It's even possible that the county determines the property tax rate in this city. It would not be logical to blame the city government for something they have no control over.

Answer choice C says:

According to Kapoor [A]

According to Galindo [B]

Therefore, if B --> /A

A = haz waste site does not pose danger to the community

B = haz waste site is on an unsuitable tract of land

Two different ideas (danger and suitability) are discussed but assumed to be the same idea. We don't know why Galindo thinks the land is unsuitable. Maybe it's because this land is really rocky and it's expensive to dig holes in the ground for burying waste. Maybe the hazardous waste just smells bad and Galindo doesn't want to drive by the waste site on the way to work every day.

Answer choice D says:

According to rivals [A]

B --> C

Therefore, Harris is a poor choice for mayor

A = Harris favors the interests of property developers

B = a good mayor

C = willing to stand up to property developers

This argument assumes that Harris is not willing to stand up to property developers. Again, this is an argument that conflates two different ideas (favoring the interests of developers and being willing to stand up to developers). There is no reason Harris can't do both. Also, even if Harris isn't "a good mayor," he could still be a better choice for mayor than anyone else who is willing to do it.

Answer choice E says:

Latest government figures claim [A]

B

Therefore, /A

A = regional unemployment rate declined in the last six months

B = the region lost thousands of manufacturing jobs

The assumption is that the unemployment rate can't go down in a period when manufacturing jobs were lost. However, maybe it was Amazon that bulldozed a factory in the region and put up an office building. The two ideas (regional unemployment and jobs in a specific industry) are not the same.

Admin note: edited title

Will I be penalized if text messages popped up on my screen while taking the official lsat writing portion? None of the messages contained anything about the exam but a good amount of group texts popped up in the right hand corner while I was working. I assumed that the secure browser would silence any notifications from my computer like honorlock and other proctoring sites do but apparently I was wrong. Has this happened to anyone else? Should I be worried?

So I been getting like low 160s the past few tests and everything is good but when I get up to a more difficult conditional LR question, I completely struggle. How do I get better at these? I tried drilling but that didn't really help that much.

I really struggle with identifying circular reasoning. The definition of circular reasoning is when the premise and conclusion are the same thing, and the author does not provide any other premises to support their conclusion. So, an example would be, "Dogs are the best pets ever. This is because dogs are the best." However, when given a more complex stimuli I really struggle. This particular stimulus gave me a hard time. I would appreciate if someone was able to explain why this particular stimulus is an example of circular reasoning.

When it comes to these harder disagreement type questions, are we supposed to look for what the two speakers explicitly disagree about or is it supposed to be implied? The video explanation seemed to indicate that it was the latter, but I feel that answer choice C points out something the two speakers were disagreeing about explicitly.

Is Answer choice B incorrect because it talks about the possibility of creating art that "people enjoy and support?" I felt that neither of the two authors gave any answer for that.

As for answer choice E, I read it as saying "express" rather than "achieve." If it had said "express," would this have been the correct answer? JY points out a bunch of assumptions you'd have to make for this to be the correct answer in the video, but are those correct assumptions? He never confirms whether they are or not and then the video ends.

I've also read other explanations that state the reason why this choice is wrong is because it talks about what is "wise" while the speakers only talk about what "should be" but how are those two things mutually exclusive? I felt that if someone were to ask either speaker whether it was wise to have public art that helped "express consensus," Laurie would say yes because it's something that public art "should do" and Elsa would say no because it's an impossible goal.

If anyone is going to answer my questions, please watch the video explanation first or you won't know what I'm talking about.

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-87-section-3-question-22/

hi! (fair warning, this a question from is the genuinely tragic mirrors passage btw): for the life of me, i cannot figure out why c is the right choice for this one. i think it's largely because i literally just don't understand what the answer choice means. like genuinely sentence/word-wise i have no friggin clue.

on a theoretical level, i get that the idea of "separating observers from scientific phenomenon" as it's discussed in the text + how this informs the tendency of scientists to prefer certain explanations for phenomena. but i don't understand how that idea is conveyed by the words of answer choice c. answer c reads: "One explanation of what mirrors do reveals the traditional tendency of physicists to separate a phenomenon to be explained from the observer of a phenomenon."

i've been racking my head trying to parse the bolded part word-by-word but i genuinely can't figure it out. isn't the point the text is making that science ppl prefer explanations that don't rely on the observer? how does "separating a phenomenon •••to be explained••• from the observer of a phenomenon" do that?? if someone could even just help break down what this part means that would be useful lol. ty in advance (3(/p)

I took the June test and am planning to register for August now in case I'm not happy with my June score. The test date change/refund deadline is July 2 for the August 14 test - why is it so early? When I was originally registered for April I was able to change my date to June for free as late as March 27. It's kind of frustrating because you only get 1 day from when the June scores come out to decide if you want to take August.

To attack the premise or not to attack the premise

I keep hearing over and over again that I'm not supposed to attack the premise but this question from the weakening portion of LR seems to do just that. Doesn't answer choice D attack the premise? If the argument concludes that it couldn't be the case that the cave paintings depicted the current diets of the painters since they must have needed to eat sea animals during the long journey there, wouldn't D attack that premise since it's saying maybe not?

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-33-section-1-question-20/

Hello everyone,

I am posting this in LR because LR is something very new and foreign to me and I feel that if I can master LR, RC is going to be a breeze. Now, I know the answer off the bat is going to be "do what feels best for you," focus, and discipline. I completely agree with that sentiment, yet I wanted to see what has worked best for you and why with the entire goal of inspiring others to learn and add new tidbits into their current strategy.

If you do chunking, how many words do you chunk when you read and why does that work for you?

For those of you who don't chunk what works best in your strategy and why?

I have realized that for myself, that I had developed very bad reading habits after leaving college, I've been out a good while so I skim a lot and hardly read as much as I used to. For now, I have gone back to "word by word" reading until I can spot important words while chunking. My goal is to chunk 3-4 words as I read.

Currently, I time out towards question 4/5 leaving me rushing to just pick an answer and pray I got it right. Slowly, I have gone from getting 1 answer right to 3/5 on a good day until I get to the level 4-5 difficulty level questions and then I get 1 or 2 right if I am lucky enough to figure it out, but then time out for questions 3,4,&5.

Looking forward to reading your story.

Thank you for your time,

Alfonso

Does anyone have a good explanation for this question? I picked B, and there is no explanation video for this question.

Hi everyone, I was wondering if someone could help me get some info on test times for the august lsat. do we get an email letting us know when we can schedule the time? How does the system work? just a first time test taker in need of a lot of help! thanks in advance!

PT #5, S1, Q#2 wrongfully labeled. Should be a Flaw Q.

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.

What was the whole process of taking LSAT FLEX? If you moved around a little (but still remained in the camera), would they accept that? Is there anything we need to download or do before the exam date? How does the writing sample work? I read from some places, we can take out own time to write the writing sample starting August exam, is this true? Also, what is the best advice during the test date, things to get ready or things to remember?

Any advice would be highly appreciated! - Thanks in advance!