Discussions

LSAT

New post

299 posts in the last 30 days

No specifics about the test, just a general question regarding experimental sections. Are experimental sections used multiple times in different years? For example, if a section was included in an administration last year or 2 years ago etc., would its inclusion in a current administration mean it was experimental previously but is now the graded section OR would it be experimental again?

0

M → F

/J → /M

/M

I took the contrapositive of M > F which got me /F > /M

Then I inferred that /F or /J would net me /M. Which means that the arrows can split in the sufficient condition.

Which means the sufficient assumption for /M would either be to negate F (/F), or to make it that /F > /J (/F > /J > /M)

Is this correct? Or am I missing some other possible sufficient assumption.

0

I know it all depends / repetition etc but im generally wondering- when I drill reading what difficulty should I do at? does anyone know what avg difficulty is on tests like one level two one level three etc for reading?

Like if I drill one 3 dot law passage, 4 dot science, 2 dot humanities, then mix it up another time, etc?

0

In another discussion post about this question (the only other post about this question), one of the responses stated:

the crux of the argument lies in the second part of the second sentence where the author makes an explicit attempt at underlining the underlying logic: "but the absence of sightings cannot prove that it does not (exist)".

In lawgic that's: if there's absence, then we cannot prove non-existence.

Absence --> /prove

In order to weaken the argument, we need to find something that's loosely along the lines of: if there's absence, then that might actually mean non-existence.

(E) encapsulates this best.

But his underlying logic doesn't really make sense to me. If Absence of sightings -> cannot prove yeti does not exist, then the contrapositive is: prove yeti does not exist -> some sightings. The contrapositive doesn't make intuitive sense. If we prove that the yeti does not exist, then there must be some sightings of the yeti? That sounds like the complete opposite of what is necessary to prove something does not exist.

How does answer choice E weaken the argument? Is focusing on the underlying logic in the final sentence the best way to approach this question?

0

When I first look at an LR question and try to map it out with conditional logic, I get the answer wrong often and in the video explanation, JY maps it out completely different than I envisioned. Sometimes, I map out elements that are irrelevant to the argument or I'm creating too complex maps that aren't easily boiled down.

What do I need to review so I can get a better understanding?

0

I am between AC (C) and (D), however feel (C) is incorrect due to the wording of such. While the part about "providing reasons for rejecting an alternative course of action" fits the description, answer choice (C) also claims "it arrives at it's conclusion indirectly". The word indirectly is what is throwing me off, as the conclusion of the argument "The Transit Authority’s proposal to increase fares by 40 percent must be implemented." is DIRECTLY stated in the very first sentence. Can someone please explain?

Admin note: Edited to remove the stimulus and answer choices. You can see our Forum Rules here: https://classic.7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/15/forum-rules

0

[I am posting on behalf of a 7Sage user. Please feel free to leave your comments below. Thank you for your help!]

Could you please help me with Main Point questions. What I am most confused by is the "how do I know this" approach. It seems that whenever I ask, "how do I know this?" for a potential conclusion statement I answer the question wrong because I am really not understanding this approach but it seems it would help the most when torn between two possible conclusion statements. Thank you.

0

I'm not sure if I understand the AC right regarding the video lesson, Harrold Foods Hero - Flaw Question (https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/harrold-foods-hero-flaw-question/).

Can anyone #help me understand and identify all the referential inferences in (D)?

(D) taking evidence (1) that a claim (2) is believed to be true to constitute evidence (3) that the claim (4) is in fact true.

evidence (1): ____________.

a claim (2): ____________.

evidence (3): ____________.

the claim (4): ____________.

Here is what I understand:

(D) taking evidence (Belief of most (72%) of consumers) that a claim (Harold foods dominates the market) is believed to be true to constitute evidence (product with more than 50 percent of sales in a market is dominating it) that the claim (Harold foods dominates the market) is in fact true.

evidence (1): Belief of most (72%) of consumers

a claim (2): Harold foods dominates the market

evidence (3): product with more than 50 percent of sales in a market is dominating it

the claim (4): Harold foods dominates the market

Any help is appreciated. Thanks in advance.

0

Does anyone’s else’s Nov Lsat notes say Score Validity Review?

I’m super nervous there’s not much info on exactly what it means. Seem like some people had theirs canceled and I’m am hoping that is not the case. Any insight would be helpful.

0

Flaw: Conditional Logic Flaw

  • A wants a mayor to help attract more businesses, THEN Cooper is the only one to support.

  • A is supporting Cooper.

    • Conclusion: A wants to attract more business

    Anticipate: 1. The author mistakes what is necessary to be sufficient and vice versa.

    2. Does supporting cooper ? Guarantee? attracting more business.

    REMEMBER KEEP PREMISES TO BE TRUE.

    it must be true that A is supporting cooper! But the conclusion is FALSE. does it mean they ONLY want more business? what if there's other reasons.

    0

    Just trying to prepare for the upcoming Nov LSAT score release....it was my second time taking the LSAT. First score was solid and good enough for most schools on my list but wanted to take Nov to improve a few points. Feeling like I did okay but always preparing for the worst—in the event that I ended up getting a lower score, should I cancel the second score??? Does whether I should cancel or not depend on how much worse the second score is? Any advice is welcome!

    0

    Hi, I recently started taking my wrong answer journaling much more seriously since my last PT rather than just doing a somewhat brief and quick BR of the questions on the site due to the anticipation of my PT score. I think I have a good grasp on my LR incorrect answer journal based on what a previous tutor told me on a post of mine a few weeks ago, writing in my explanations for new or kept answers during a BR, so I can then evaluate my thinking when I see whether I was right or not, and what other inferences/tidbits of info I may have missed even if I was right, based on JY's explanations. Though for RC I am not really sure what to do, as I find it harder to remember what my reasoning was typically, due to it being more intuitive rather than cookie cutter in contrast to LR due to the nature of reading longer texts and passages, I find for my self at least. Maybe this shows a glaring flaw in how I approach RC.

    P.S: Are there any recommendations for a good and free screen recording software that I can use during PTs?

    0

    Why is it that for MBT questions we do not try all scenarios before picking an AC? For example, question 3 reads, “If K sits directly between L & P, then M must sit between..” for this in the live commentary, she writes PKL but doesn’t try for LKP. I understand that both scenarios lead to the same AC. However, shouldn’t we try all scenarios before selecting an AC? A MBT AC should apply to all scenarios, not just one. Just trying to figure out what’s best practice. #help

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

    0

    Confirm action

    Are you sure?