Discussions

LSAT

New post

343 posts in the last 30 days

Hi everyone,

I first started studying for the LSATs about a year ago, and have taken the LSAT 3 times since then. I plan on applying this year.

Nov 2018: 161

Mar 2019: 161

Jul 2019: 163

I had been consistently PTing at 165+ since May, but my digital July testing center had issues which I know affected my performance. I'm planning on taking the test one more time in November, and since I have another shot, I was hoping to tackle the 2 things that have consistently brought my score down: flaw + argument part question types.

I can tell you all 19 flaw types and I can tell you exactly what the highlighted argument part phrase/sentence is doing in an argument -- in my own words. My problem is the freaking answer options... I feel like 95% of the time I have a hard time understanding what the answer options are actually saying. Is it just me or has anyone else struggled with this? I have generally taken the strategy of skipping those questions and coming back to them, but now that I've (literally) bought myself another opportunity, I thought I'd try to master these.

If you are a tutor and think I could benefit from a session with you, please let me know! I'm open to tutoring at this point as well.

Thanks!

FW

0

Does anyone consistently approach weakening questions like RRE and see consistent results?

I just took PT 85 S3 and on Q24 JY shows how to resolve the question using an RRE method. I see exactly why this question is right now and have a great understanding for RRE questions (it's my favourite question type as I can often get them right even if I have no idea what's going on lol).

So I was wondering if it might be good to leverage my strengths and try it out , but thought I would ask to see if anyone else does this. :)

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-85-section-3-question-24/

0

these two games are a perfect example of why I get confused as to when I should set up my game board as a grouping sequencing game or a regular grouping. What throws me off is that they both have inherent order (game 1: 1 3 5, and game 2: 1 2 3).

I would appreciate any insight as to how some of you are able to determine what type of game board is needed in these situation. Thanks!

0

I dont know how to get faster. I've been doing RC practice for so long and I cant get faster. I easily do LG and LR on time but not RC, any tips on how to get faster that you did that worked for you? Skipping words made me do worse.

0

Hey everyone I tried searching through the forums to see if there were any hits and I didn't see anything but I am a little confused on general principles. I am doing pretty well on the method of reasoning portion of the curriculum knock on wood but one area that I've noticed myself wasting too much time on are on answer choices that mention something to do with the argument using a general principle. I've been getting in the habit of quickly attempting to come up with an example of whatever the answer choice is and then comparing that to the argument featured in the stimulus that I have summed up in my own words but I keep second guessing myself on the answer choices with something to do with a general principle.

In the second lesson of the method of reasoning curriculum JY uses the "all jedi use the force" or "all apples are fruit" as examples for a general principle. That makes sense to me but then I'll see some stimulus's where either a premise or conclusion will say something that I think could be interpreted as a general principle and then that gray area is the source of my question. Most recent example was form LSAT 19 Section 4 Question 18 June 1996. I got it right during blind review but it seems like this is one simple fix I can make to tighten my shot group. Does anyone have any other examples of general principles or any tips on their approach?

-Stay safe and thank you for your time!

0

Absolutely clueless on this one. I've probably watched the video 5 times, and I just don't see how B weakens the argument that is in the passage. Also, can someone look at my reasoning for A?

Win democratic elections not fully subsidized--->poor candidates supported by rich. As a result, it could be true that the poor candidates will compromise their positions to win the rich guy's support. However, the proportion of rich people in all of the political parties is the same as their proportion in the population. Thus, the belief that it could be true that poor candidates will compromise their position to win the rich people's support is wrong.

What I am looking for: The premise doesn't support the conclusion at all since we don't know whether being proportionally equal nullifies the pressure to conform to the rich guy's opinion. For example, say that rich people are 1% of the population in all political parties; they must then be 1% of the total population. It might be reasonable to say that the rich don't have that big of an influence on policy. Now, what if the proportion was 99%? The rich might have a huge say in policy! Thus, the premise could go both ways in either providing support for the conclusion or not.

Answer A: This is what I chose, but I still am very unsure why it is wrong. I think the argument does fail to address this answer choice. Maybe it is wrong because of the word "primary?" I'm not so sure though since we are usually supposed to accept the answer choices as true. If it is the case that the "primary" function of a party still may not negate the influence of wealth, then doesn't this paraphrase the flaw very well? To me, this is hinting at the idea that the proportion of the wealthy might be so high (or so influential) in political parties that it doesn't matter which one the poor candidate choose, they will have to conform to the wealthy point of view's party.

Say that the word "primary" is the reason why this is wrong (which I am not really sure why it would be), what if this answer choice said "a function of political parties...?" Would it be correct then?

Answer B: Like I said earlier, I just don't see how this weakens the argument. I do think it weakens an argument, just not the one in the passage. Here is my breakdown of this answer choice: say the poor candidate believes, "Every person who takes the LSAT should get a 180 and full ride to Yale" but the Democrats and Republicans both think "absolutely not" (the positions of the parties is way less varied than the position of the candidate). Then sure, joining a political party would compromise the poor candidate's views. But, that isn't the argument in the passage. The argument is that the "possibility of a poor candidate compromising his views to win the support OF THE RICH [not the political party] is not true." How are these two the same argument? In other words, if this is true, isn't the LSAT equivocating between the views of the "political parties" and the views of the "wealthy patrons?"

Answer C: We don't care about government subsidized elections.

Answer D: We don't care about wealthy candidates.

Answer E: We don't care about other flaws.

0

Parallel questions have been a huge flaw of mine in PT and drilling, does any1 have any tips that will help me not be utterly confused?

0

The answer should be D, as the other answers all call for too much. There is no apparent need for real strength. 'To be believed' is the key phrase.

0

I am trying to apply to Cardozo law for next year, and it is not updated or something is not working right.

It is only giving me the option of applying for 2021 and it says applications are coming soon, instead of for 2020.

Anyone else having this problem?

0

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.

0
User Avatar
•

Thursday, Sep 19, 2019

katemart191

time zones ...

just realized like three days ago that I signed up for the LSAT in the eastern time zone and I live in central!!! I have been trying to wake up at 6:30am (central) this week so it won't be as bad when I have to wake up at 7:30 (eastern) but that was definitely something I should have considered when signing up!!! oops. any tips from anyone?? thanks in advance

0

This is a method of reasoning question. I got the answer correct - B - because stimulus goes and defines unnatural and uses that to destroy the absurd claim it sets out to. However, why is AC D wrong? Is it b/c it is partially right and not fully correct. The claim does say doing something unnatural is impossible - hence to a certain degree that would be a contradiction...

Thoughts?

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

Admin note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-48-section-3-passage-4-passage/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-48-section-3-passage-4-questions/

0

ive been studying lsat for a year already (approximately 1-2 hrs a day). My initial pt score is 153, and after 3-4 months I got around 160. However the score just doesn't go up anymore. I about to take the test on dec. 6th so I have literally 2 months left. My target in dec is 165+. Is that reasonable?

I just purchased this course 5 days ago and I found this course really useful but, I've already wasted all the pts (40-75). So I don't know how to follow the schedule of this course in a smarter way in this case.

I quit my job few days ago so now I have 8 hrs ago (!!!)

Anybody who got similar experience or anybody who has any idea about what should I do now?

0

But I was under the impression that conditional statements are not comparisons. I read the first sentence as a comparison and therefore ignored it since I did not read it as a conditional statement. How should I have broken down the first sentence to see the conditional?

0

Confirm action

Are you sure?