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

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/

I want to know why answer E is wrong. In Manhattan Prep. It says "everyday food" is irrelevent to the question. However, couldnt water be part of everyday food? Is this also making assumptions?

Admin note: edited title

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.

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.

Hello!

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

Hi everyone! I feel like I heard someone mention in the comments or maybe in the 7sage podcast that there is a way to foolproof LR, but I can't remember where I heard that or how to do it. Does anyone have any ideas?

Hi everyone, I'm looking for a study partner that is doing well on RC (-0-2) and wants to help someone that isn't! Message me if you are interested!

Hi everyone ! Is there anyone in the Boston area! I would love to create a study buddy group for those taking the June LSAT

Hi,

I chose E, but the answer was A.

Here's supposedly why the answer is A: given that the question is asking for what would "most support the author's claim [on lines 24-27] about the relationship between muralism and the Mexican Revolution", people are treating this question as if the "claim about the relationship" is the statement on 26-27: that the muralists reflected important innovations in the art world (thus leading to the correct answer = answer choice A.

Here's why I chose E: I thought that a relationship had to be a connection between the Mexican Revolution and muralism, so I was focusing on the phrase that muralism was the result of changes that the Mexican Revolution represented (line 24-26). This led me to choose E, since this looked like the only answer choice that could possibly support a claim regarding the relationship between Muralism and Mexican Revolution.

In other words, I didn't agree with A's reasoning because the claim on 26-27 only talks about muralism and doesn't connect it with Mexican Revolution.

Can anybody explain how answer choice A was correct? How were we supposed to know that this claim regarding this relationship was that described on lines 26-27 rather than that described on 24-26?

Any #help would be appreciated!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-39-section-3-passage-1-questions/

Hi,

Can anyone explain why the answer is B instead of C? Why exactly is C wrong?

Hey guys, so my LR score finally has been improved (well sort of), I have been doing some times LR sections from prep tests 1-15 and I usually spend about an hour or an hour and a half on each LR section, I've been scoring either 14/26 or 16/26.

In general, for each question type I am not consistent in my scoring (for example, the test could have 3 or 4 Resolve Reconcile Explain questions and I'll get 1 or 2 right and the rest wrong). Another example, for MC questions if there is a sub conclusion and I noticed that LR timed sections have these, I won't be able to figure out which is the exact main conclusion (see question 4 on prep test 15 as an example).

There is no one question type I am good at, but I notice that the harder the level of difficulty the more likely I get it wrong.

How can I improve my score to at least a 20 and should I be doing timed sections? I am not really sure what to do next.

Oh and if anyone PLEASE has or knows of any resources that can help me improve on Weakening, Flaw and Necessary Assumption Questions that would be great because they are my biggest nightmare.

Thanks! :)

If this is not the hardest question on the set, I don't know which is. I had a great time trying to understand this question and why C is correct and spent an hour just scratching my head trying to figure it out. Would still love to see what everyone thinks about this question. But so far I don't see that many asking about this question so here is my take on it.

Background: Some researchers claim that people gesture less when expressing abstract instead of physical ideas

Premise: Some people perceive words in different ways: for a word that has both abstract and physical understanding, people can perceive it as either abstract or physical

Conclusion: The argument that the researchers' claim is not universal is not sufficient reason to reject it.

WTF. What are the connections between the premise and the conclusion? It seems to me that the premise is trying to say that the researchers' claim MIGHT WELL BE universal.

The argument implies that the critics would challenge the researchers' claim by doubting its univsersality. It might be something like this: the word "comprehension" represents an abstract concept, but some people apparently gesture and make a grabbing movement when they say it. This is a disproving evidence that would show that this claim is not universal, therefore it can be rejected.

Author counters by saying: hey, "comprehension" doesn't have to mean the abstract concept of understanding. It can definitely mean "catching" or "grasping." Not so fast critics, the claim of the researchers can still be universal: people just understand a word differently, and their actions regarding gesturing when expressing different words or concepts are still in accordance with what the researchers have claimed. Just because someone does gesture when expressing a word that has an abstract definition does not mean that person are thinking of the abstract definition of that word. He or she might well be expressing the physical definition instead of the abstract one. In this line of reasoning, the researchers' claim still stand and still might be universal.

AC C matches this pretty well. The author is trying to use a psychological fact (people perceive words in different definition) to reconcile a general claim (researchers' 'people gesture less with abstract concepts'") with apparently disconfirming evidence (people do NOT always gesture less when expressing abstract concepts). I find this line of reasoning the most applicable to the right answer to this question. I might be dead wrong with this, and I would love to see what others have to say about this.

I'm really confused between A and D too and can't still understand why A is wrong.

I chose A. The reason why I thought D was wrong is "widely accepted theory" part. The author said it has "gradually" won accepted (Line 20) rather than widely accepted. I think gradually accepted and widely accepted are totally different.

So how is it possible D is the right answer?

And why is A wrong?

Please someone enlighten me.

Thanks!

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-42-section-3-passage-4-questions/

Correct me if I am wrong in my explanation. I am not sure about my explanations for "B" and "D"

*The kind of question this is:* Weaken

*CTX:* Post office must be replaced with a larger one.

*Premise(s):*

• The present one cannot be replaced.

• Land near the present (center of town) location is more expensive.

• Cost of acquiring a site is a significant part of the total construction cost.

*Conclusion:* Post office can be built more cheaply on the outskirts of town.

*What I am looking for:* A reason, that outweighs the burden of cost, in favour of the office to being built near the present (center of town) location, rather than on the outskirts.

*Answer A:* No. That is just information. Irrelevant. The building code is not a stated obstacle.

*Answer B:* Yes. The office on the outskirts will need a parking lot that is more expensive than not having one.

*Answer C:* No. That’s an issue that the new post office would not need to worry about. It is not mentioned how this would be a problem.

*Answer D:* No. So what if they have to deliver mail to home. The mail will still arrive to the costumers. The post office on the outskirts will still be in business.

*Answer E:* No. That’s not a problem. That’s just the process that will be taken to build the office in the center of town.

Hello, I'm struggling with understanding Hybrid games. I have a solid foundation on ordering and grouping but for some reason hybrid is tough. Are there any tutors that specialize in Hybrid games?

I've been finishing up each LR section with usually 5-8 min to go back and review in real time. At that point, I'm reviewing the questions I've been stumped on within a real time frame. So when I go to finish the PT and it tells me to go back and look at those questions again - I don't really see the point? PLUS sometimes the BR is for qs I got right so that's just a mind warp. Am I the only one who thinks this way?

Im trying to isolate why i found this section so hard. Anyone else have a hard time w it?

Hi,

I understand why C is right, but what I have trouble understanding is why D is wrong.

I mean, in terms of D, couldn't it be argued that Politician P is "appealing to wholly irrelevant issues" by talking about taxpayers' happiness to distract from the real issue of whether or not there is an obligation to raise taxes?

Any #help would be appreciated!

Admin note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-26-section-2-question-04/

help This might be a dumb question.

I get the correct answer (emphasize the degree of unpredictability in S and O model) However, I was hesitant to pick it because I somehow interpreted it to mean that the model itself is unpredictable, not that the ideas in the model are unpredictable. I think it's because I interpreted it to mention degree of unpredictability of the model not in the model. Is there a difference in these 2? How do I differentiate whether they are discusses the model itself or elements of it.

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-50-section-1-passage-4-questions/

Evidence -> Not Guilt

but now Evidence --> Guilt

Evidence must have changed.

A = B

now A = not B

A has changed.

(Answer B): Train = not Nantes at 11.

But now Train = Nantes at 11

Train has changed

Any idea whether test takers are allowed to use a touch screen laptop & stylus pen for the LSAT Flex? My reading comprehension & overall performance is much better when I can use the pen.

.

I am taking the Jan LSAT and scoring well on LG and LR but RC keeps dragging me down. What is the best way to boost my RC score with just over two weeks until test day?

Does anyone know if applying early binding decision to chicago will greatly decrease the potential financial aid I get? That is basically the only reason I am considering not doing it. Would love insights!