Discussions

LSAT

New post

300 posts in the last 30 days

Hello! I hope everyone’s June LSAT went well. I am writing because I had to cancel my score for the June LSAT because the proctor bothered me so many times during the first two sections I practically had no focus and was stressed the whole exam. Did this happen to anybody else? I was interrupted many times because apparently I was “out of the camera frame” when I was using my scratch paper or when I came close to the laptop screen and my forehead was cut out. This was really frustrating because I can’t see myself on the camera during the test and I just don’t want to worry about this on the next exam. Does anyone have any advice on how to avoid this? A special camera that people used or a certain distance they kept themselves from the laptop?

Thank you!

0

Let's make those marginal gains in this marginal game.

Looking for like-minded LSAT loving loonies, preferably already PTing 170+ and can BR 175-180 with a goal of achieving PT-BR convergence and planning to absolutely kill it for the August 2022, maybe beyond.

Intending to discuss and document inferences that break LGs wide open, reading strategies that illuminate the densest RC passages, authoritatively reasoning the most convoluted LR questions, identifying and dodging LSAT writers' most subtle question traps, and making the most of all 2100 precious seconds of an LSAT timed section. Also intend to analyze common patterns of LSAT sections and questions with the intent of being able to identify inferences and predict questions and anticipate answers before even attacking the questions.

Planning on regularly scheduled strategy discussion workshopping, coordinated competitive timed PT takes, and exhaustively thorough and accurate blind review. Goal of at least a few hours of productive LSAT time daily.

DM with your info and availability, maybe a list of some of your untouched PTs. Will determine a workable schedule and setup zoom sessions or a discord server. Let's gooooo.

0

Hello all,

I recently took the June 2022 Test and am not pleased with my score. Compared to my other test in January I did improve but only by 3 points. 133-136. I know not the best and a bad score. But my score I need is only a 146. So I’m 10 points off.

By this fall, I’m starting a career job, and all. But I am contemplating a retake for a third test in the future.

I need advice though: should I wait and study longer? Since this last test I studied from February to Early June so almost 4 months. But this time should I take 8-12 months instead? Also, what other strategies would anyone recommend this time around? Mix of 7Sage, Books and a tutor?

Again, I think I am going to take a 2-3 week break to strategize a new plan with any advice y’all can give me and hit the ground running in August/early September

Thanks.

0

This question is a little complicated to parse because their are two agents in the discussion, the nation who may attack (Potential Aggressor [PA]) and the nation who may be attacked (Target). Clarifying who is who helps set up the lawgic from the stimulus.

In the stimulus you get:

PAs having Fear of Retaliation implies that PAs will hesitate to attack (PAFR -> PAHesitate)

PAFR also implies that PAs are deterred (PAFR -> DetersPAs)

You also get this, which is very unweildy:

if PA thinks Target has great retaliatory power then PA thinks it CANNOT defend itself

(PAThinkTargetHasRetaliatoryPwr -> /PAThinkCanDefend)

an inference we can make right away is:

if /PAThinkCanDefend -> PAFR

if PAs think they CANNOT defend against retaliation then PAs have a fear of retaliation

Now we apply valid argument form 3 - Transitive:

PAThinksTargetHasGreatRetaliatoryPwr -> /PAThinkCanDefend -> PAFR -> DetersPAs & PAHesitate

Is there an answer choice that leverages the first step in order to optimize the final step? D does.

D: if you want deterrence, tell everyone about your great retaliatory power (because of the lawgic from the stimulus).

A: says "DeterPAs -> /PAThinkCanDefend" which confuses the given sufficient and necessary elements

B: says "PAThinksPA(self)HasGreatRetaliatoryPwr -> DetersPAs" and the stimulus doesn't say anything about that first part

C: assumes nations always attack unless deterred, which common sense indicates is probably false (hopefully) But aside from real world knowledge, it says "if PAHesitate -> /PAThinkCanDefend" (if PA hesitates then PA thinks it can't defend against retaliation). What we can say is that SOME PAs that hesitate were deterred. This answer choice is the same as A in its error.

E: We don’t know that retaliatory force has to be GREATER, only that it has to be “so great that a potential aggressor nation would have reason to think that it could not defend itself against such retaliation.” Also, superlatives like "maximum" give me pause and seem to appear in false answer choices often.

0

I've been studying for about 5 months and am taking the August LSAT. I've gone from a 156 diagnostic to solid mid-160 PTs using Mike Kim's LSAT Trainer in tandem with 7Sage explanation videos and analytics.

I recently got two scores of 168, was feeling really close to reaching my goal of 170+, but on the last two PTs I missed a lot on LR and fell back down to 165 and 163, respectively. I'm especially nervous because I had no idea that I was bombing LR and actually felt pretty confident.

Any tips for sharpening my LR in this last month push?

(I have a full-time job and am currently devoting 10-15 hours a week to studying; an expensive tutor isn't an option)

Thanks in advance!

0

Hi everyone,

JY often says that it's a good idea to scan the question types in a LG before deciding whether to split: if there will be more gameboards than questions without additional premises, then it's best not to split; if there are more questions without additional premises than gameboards, it's worth splitting.

I understand that it would be easy to scan these on paper versions of the test, but I am wondering whether others do this on digital versions of the test? Do people click through the questions to see what type they are before diagramming? Is this time efficient on the digital version of the test?

Thanks!

0

To my understanding, the push stoke was a defect with the new garden rake. And if it is the only defect, then the evaluation between the new gardening rake and the straight rake stands cause it is base on the whatever defect the new gardening rake has and it is the push stoke.

0

This question doesn't have an explanation, so here's my thought process.

Question Stem- Principle Question

Stimulus- Machines and tech alter our choices. (example). Clock altered our choices by allowing synch +. HOWEVER, clock also closed some doors. Living without clock is kinda impossible now.

So Machines and tech that alter our choices can have some downsides as well.

A. This makes sense, however, the use of "enslave" and "liberate" sounds really extreme. Keep for now.

B. No. The stimulus no where says what people should and shouldn't do.

C. That MAY be true, however, not what the stimulus is saying.

D. The stimulus does not weigh the pros and cons, so we don't know if it was worth our dependence or not.

E. "Most"??? We only know about one instance that made our life more synchronized and productive. There MAY be more machines. However, that is not within the scope of the premises, and therefore out.

Only answer remaining- A. Correct.

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

0

Can someone explain why B is the right answer? The stem states that it is unknown why people purchased broadsides, or how their beliefs related to the broadsides. If these statements are true, why does having having crime and adultery in the broadsides show that people may not have been serious about moral values? Aren't the two given statements proof that the broadsides don't have to be truly moral for the 17th century people to be moral?

0

For each drill question, it shows a "curve" for the likelyhood of someone with that score getting the question right. But im feeling a bit confused on what that exactly means. So if the black bar is at "135" for example, it means that someone with a 135 was likely to get that question right?

0

Hello,

Can somebody link me the section in the syllabus for the strategies when taking a "double" reading comprehension section? I'm pretty good at all RC except for those questions that have to do with two passages

0

For the time scheduling of the lsat that is done through Proctor U, does anyone know if we need to create an account with Proctor U before scheduling or do we wait for the email to come in with instructions? I tried to create an account but I didn't know what institution to put.

0

I chose (C) and I think it's wrong because passage B doesn't cite any authorities. But I take issue with the correct answer being (A) because it says that passage A "[doesn't] provide details," which I think it does. Doesn't citing what might be necessary requirements for a principle of rectification count as "details"?

Any help and clarification would be much appreciated.

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

Explanation video: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-73-section-1-passage-4-questions/

0

Hey everyone, so I'm at that stage were I'm spamming practice tests/reviewing them afterwords. and I've really hit an issue with reviewing my answers for logical reasoning. My problem is every time I go to review the questions and try to re-solve them, I noticed that I already have the answer memorized before I even finish the stimulus and what's worse is I have the reason it was correct memorized too so I don't feel like I'm able to learn how to solve it properly for a similar question. Even for PTs I did weeks ago same issue. What do I do...

Also while you're still here bonus here, any tips on reviewing wrong answers on LR when there's no particular pattern to which types I get wrong?

0

So I just took the August test. At the beginning of the test before the proctor got in, I had my do not disturb on, then when my proctor joined she turned my do not disturb off (I think she thought she was turning it on). With about 20 minutes left in my last section, I got a text saying "Have you taken the lsat yet". I have a mac so it popped up on my laptop too. I didn't open the text or anything I just waited for it to go away. I started panicking and began to go to turn do not disturb back on using the top right bar but then didn't. What are the chances my test get flagged or something else?

0

I understand in-person study groups may not be recommended by 7sage for different reasons.

In my humble opinion there is nothing like in-person college-like cramming where different people may come together and assist in what others find difficult to comprehend & vice-versa.

I was wondering if there are any in-person study groups near SouthbBay area in a public, quiet place (I.E. a Library's study room). If not, would there be people willing to participate in one?Alternatively a Zoom Group would be good enough. LMK!

I have created a survey to get something concrete going on person or through ZOOM, as I've not been contacted by authors of other discussions. Feel Free to Complete Interested, since I haven't been contacted -I've done a survey for those interested. If so feel free to complete so that there's something concrete going. https://forms.gle/kZLjU8VVny6Nrv4w7

0

I chose (E) as my answer because "Selfish individualism" which was suggested as a menace to the integrity of society is not necessarily equivalent to the concept of selfishness, a fundamental motivator of human actions throughout the history (at least in this passage). There is a missing link which remains unexplained to bridge the gap between these two. I thought it was a snake-oil seller tactic switching terms in the vicinity with no proper justification. (A) is improper as there would have been no reason to defy the relevance of that argument in this passage iff he/she had offered us a coherent concept of excessive self-interest. Instead of reducing one of the social ills that epitomized the decade to "Selfish individualism", the author could have said "selfishness". Then, the whole passage can adhere to one particular theme with congruity. (B) is not germane to the argument because no numeric data is demanded whose absence can dismantle the validity of the argument entirely. It could undermine or weaken its cogency at best. (C) is the opposite of the argument. The writer perceives it as a chronic condition ailing our humanity from Day one. (D) is a nut job since we do not need to look into the case of other species to beef up the case against our unconditional/uncalculating benevolence. If humans are born to be driven by their own lust and lucre as part of basic instincts, then any author should channel all of one's efforts to cull out instances related to that hypothesis. The rest would be a dog-and-pony show. Thus, I opted for (E) as my final answer choice. According to the first half of the passage, the innate desire of humans to reveal their true blood even at the cost of damaging others was a culprit putting our society's harmony in jeopardy in the 1980s. Then, the second half of it has a different selling pitch: selfishness in the human history. This ever-lasting character lets him/her question the nature of good will by mankind in general. What I failed to see was the connection between them. What do you think about this? Do you mind sharing the rationale behind ur decision?

0

Confirm action

Are you sure?