Any North Carolina Study groups? Especially in the Raleigh-Durham area?

Hi,

Can anyone help explain why the answer here is E instead of C? I understand why A,B, and D are wrong, but I just don't understand why C is wrong. I felt the main idea of the passage was that we need to reform the way we rehabilitate child criminals, which seemed to me to be a form of cooperation between criminologists and law enforcement (since creating such policy would be a form of law enforcement finally acting on the criminologists' findings).

Any #help would be appreciated!

Thanks!

Anyone have a comprehensive list which they use to review/drill which question type is an argument we must look for vs not an argument...etc

The problem sets for the Most Strongly Supported Statements have been very helpful in fine tuning my skills. However, I am in dire need of help with the questions that are considered High Priority. I cannot seem to correctly figure them out.

What works best for you?

Hi,

When I was looking at the answer choices for this question, I noticed that answer choice B states something about "actual legal dilemmas". As a result, I rejected answer choice B because, while I noticed the mention of legal dilemmas in general throughout the passage, I did not see any mention of a single "actual" legal dilemma example. However, when looking at other answer explanations, no one seems to mention this as a reason for rejecting answer choice B. Is my perception of what "_actual_legal dilemma" means correct here or am I just fantasizing? I understand why E is right and why A,C,D are wrong. #help

Thanks!

Admin note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-30-section-3-passage-3-questions/

Hi,

this was a weird LR question that I thought somebody might have some insight on. I used Process of Elimination to find that E was the only possible right answer, but I was not completely sure how E was the right answer when it stated that the Student's criteria was "inconsistent" with "the principle the historian advanced".

For something to be inconsistent with something else, they must contradict each other. The principle the Historian brings up is that "Alexander the Great should not be judged by appeal to current notions of justice". However, the student only stated that, in order to tell if Alexander the Great raised contemporary standards, one would need to "invoke standards other than those of his own culture". This criteria does not HAVE to contradict the principle the Historian brings up because "standards other than those of his own culture" might or might not include "current notions of justice".

Can anybody explain how E is right here?

Any #help would be appreciated!

Hi,

I understand why B here is right, but I have trouble understanding why D is completely wrong. After all, couldn't "some" footprints include the footprints that Dr. Tyson is looking at, and couldn't missing a feature of the original footprint lead to a huge change in how the footprint is interpreted?

Any #help would be appreciated!

Thanks!

Hi,

When I was looking at the answer choices of this question, I was stuck between B, C, and E. Can anyone help explain why B is right and why C and E are wrong?

Any #help would be appreciated!

Thanks!

Hi guys,

Here is the gist: I have a scientific background and tend to do well on science passages. I suck at art and humanities passages.

It seems like I can go -0 pretty easily on 1 and 2 star passages, -1 on 3 star passages, and anything between -2 to -4 on 4 and 5 star passages.

Obviously I have difficulty with the hard and hardest passages. I find that I read the stimulus in about 3:30 minutes and usually that is enough to understand 1 to 3 star passages really well to get most of the questions right. Spend the same amount of time on 4 and 5 star passages though, and I get a lot of questions wrong timed. I know that it is because a) I spin my wheels on difficult questions and b) I did not fully understand the passage.

I know what I have to do in order to address a), but for b) it seems to be a case of... I need to do a drill set/intensive on hard reading comp passages. I went ahead and printed all the 4 to 5 star passages from PT 7 to 35. Going to do them timed and blind review. And then put them away/archive them and redo them after some time has passed. What do you think?

Hi,

So Im averaging -8 on the LR section. There's a pattern to my incorrect answers though. They are all sufficient assumptions, principle, or parallel reasoning questions. They all require me to map out the argument and understand whats missing or to mirror the same map to something else.

The problem is that I don't understand how to map out reasoning. I can do simple ones but on my own, all my diagrams are confusing. HELP!

Hi,

For some reason, I just found this question really difficult. I was really kind of stuck between B and E, and I wasn't sure about either of them because it is hard to find direct textual evidence that I can connect back to what the question is asking for. For instance, B looked right because of lines 35-36. E looked sort of right due to lines 57-58. However, what made it really hard for me to decide the answer choice was lines 32-35-- if finding common grounds to communicate is "impossible" then how is it "resolvable" in the first place? This sentence made A look sort of right, and made me doubt my previous thinking...

Can anyone give an explanation for this question?

Any #help would be appreciated!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-31-section-4-passage-4-questions/

So I’m having some difficulty eliminating Answer choice A and wondering why my interpretation of it is incorrect.

A says: “The truth of a given description is independent of its emotional vividness.”

I interpreted this to mean, whether a description is true or false is independent of emotional vividness. I remember from both passages that the respective authors thought that telling lies increased emotional vividness, so I thought A was correct by reasoning that if something is untrue then emotional vividness increases. Shakespeare in the first passage and subjectivity in autobiography in the second illustrated this. So I reasoned that truthfulness, as interpreted as being true or false is not independent of emotional vividness, because at least of aspect of truthfulness, being false—increases emotional vividness.

Obviously, this was an incorrect interpretation. Just wondering how I could know that from reading the answer choice, and how I could ascertain the correct one.

Thanks!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-88-section-3-passage-2-questions/

Hi all I find I have some difficulty on numbers related LR questions, there was a MBT question on pt 89 dealing with average numbers of students in night classes and an easier question on pt 80.1.2 (flaw question) where it's a numerator denominator trap.

I remember someone saying "you have to know 2 of 3 things to make a valid inference, you have to know at least 2/3 of the numerator, denominator, or the %." Am I remembering this correctly?

Also does anyone have any tips from figuring these numbers questions out easily? Thanks!

Hi, I've been hitting the mid-high 160's and I'm finding my core weakness is not understanding what the ACs are saying. This means the AC is using hard referential phrasing, or weird grammar like using embedded clauses without commas / run-on sentences, or the wording is just ambiguous.

I'm trying to parse the sentence piece by piece in my BR, but does anyone have any help for this issue?

My solutions so far are: parse word by word / phrase by phrase in BR, reduce the AC down to subject verb object. This is still really hard and I miss a lot of questions just because I don't know what the AC is trying to tell me. Thanks!

#help

#help!

Hi,

This was a very weird author's-attitude question. Even when I look at the correct line (line 24), I still don't fully understand how the answer here is B. (I thought the answer was A because of how the author described Bentham's reform as revolutionary and then goes on to describe the flaws behind the reform). Why is B right?

Any #help would be appreciated!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-33-section-2-passage-4-questions/

Hi,

I chose C here because I thought it was supported by lines 5-7 and I didn't choose B because I didn't see how the passage showed how laws were less/more rigid (since I didn't see anything about laws being flexible or changeable). Can anyone help explain why B is right and C is wrong?

Any #help would be very appreciated!

Thanks!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-33-section-2-passage-4-questions/

loophole teaches us to solve wordy parallel questions by running the numbers (principle & parallel question chapter). How can I apply this method during the actual exam and study period?

PT30 Game 2

The six messages on an answering machine were each left by one of Fleure, Greta, Hildy, Liam, Pasquale, or Theodore...

Anyone know of similar games? This one cost me a perfect LG section... which was infuriating because it's so easy once you get it. Wanting to try a similar game fresh.

Hi everyone,

Now this was a weird parallel flaw question because I feel like there are so many different answer explanations for the answer choices on this question all over the web, and I am not sure which ones are the most reliable. Thus, I felt maybe listing what I thought here would help clarify stuff, and I want to know what people here think (is my reasoning here look correct or not correct?)

What I thought was the flaw: transferring a non-transferrable trait from X to a reproduction of X

A-- right because it matches the flaw (crossed out A during the actual timed test because the trait isn't the same in wording like we see in the stimulus)

B-- wrong because this is a conditional relationship, not an argument

C-- wrong because this is a conditional relationship, not an argument

D-- wrong because we want to see some trait transfer from Jo to Layne, and we don't see that

E-- wrong because being similar is not the same as imitating/reproducing (chose E during my PT because I didn't realize this)

Any feedback would be very much appreciated!

thanks!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-36-section-1-question-21/

Is anyone else familiar with JY's suggestion of turning weakening questions into resolve questions (essentially reading all the premises and negating the conclusion in the stimulus, ultimately creating a paradox)? I have a lot of trouble with weakening questions, but when I turn them into resolve questions they seem so much easier to solve. Is this a method that I should adapt or could it become detrimental?

In hindsight I understand why D is correct (PT 3 section 2 Q 9), but I eliminated it because in the STIMULUS the comparison was to the same amount of whole milk. The question stem tells us that the coconut oil doesn't "usually cause" the blood cholesterol level to rise which allows us to consider the fact that people use more of one product than another. Is this type of chunky question stem that allows for a gap in reasoning that wasn't present in the stimulus happen in other LSAT LR questions? Or is this abnormal since it's a very old test?

Hi,

So I can see why C is definitely a better answer choice than all the rest. However, I find myself confused by the fact that I am not sure how we can tell that the author thinks that doctrine of precedent is a "useful tool" here. Can anyone #help me with this?

Thanks!

Best regards

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-38-section-3-passage-2-questions/

Has anyone taken the May LSAT-Flex on a Surface Go tablet/ laptop. I just want to see how your experience was. I am a bit anxious as when I test my camera on the proctor U site, the camera freezes a bit. I want to know if this is normal or if I should think of using a different laptop.

Thanks in advance for your feedback.

I am working on the LG section of the CC. I am fool proofing all of the games as I go through them, examples and timed sections. How much time should I plan to give between runs on a particular game? After writing a game out 3-4 times (twice a day), I am able to get it down quickly, but I also feel like I am just memorizing. Is there a particular set of games that we are supposed to full proof or just do them as we go? I am also planning on testing in August, so I have about 3 months to work with.

Hi,

Based on all the discussion online, this question seems to be very infamous, so anybody who can help me here would be a genius.

I was stuck between A and E here-- they both looked so good, so I ended up sticking with E (the wrong answer) because E had slightly more accurate terminology (I thought that maybe "environmental consequences" in A may not be the same thing as "environmental degradation" as stated in the stimulus and E). A ended up being the right answer (not surprised there), but how is E wrong?!?

My prephrase here was that: "Thus, the electric car will not result in an abatement of environmental degradation caused by auto emissions"

E looked right to me because abatement (according to the dictionary) seems to mean the same thing as "net reduction". As a result, E looked like a perfect answer almost word for word.

Can anybody explain why E here is completely wrong?

Thanks!

Best regards