What do we do when there are two conditional indicators? For example:

No student is chosen for Gryffindor unless they exhibit bravery. Therefore, if a student exhibits bravery, they will be sorted to Gryffindor. Lawgic:

A → B

B → A

The argument is invalid.

How come it is not /chosen->/exhibit bravery? indicator “no” and indicator “unless” make negate sufficient condition and negate necessary condition. If we create the contrapositive it makes brave-> chosen which matches the second sentence.

I've read if you want to master logic games, best practice is to model your logical process after JY's by watching the videos to build the same mental processes he employs.

So normally when I get stumped on a game I head to the video explanation. But on a particular game (PT33, game 3) I was able to do it without video, but it took me 30+ minutes. Is there value in struggling through a game like that? Or is it better to cut right to the video? I'm to the point where I rarely have to rely on the videos, so I was feeling stubborn and knew I could do it. Wdyt?

Edited to add, I got them all correct! Just took awhile.

I don't understand the difference between answer choices D and E, they both seem to be saying the same thing.

Admin Note: Edited title. For LR questions, please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

Hi,

I have went through the cc of 7sage a little bit ago, and are moving into the LG section of the cc. However, as many have recommended, I have been trying to incorporate LR drills while going through the LG section of cc. I have been trying to do drills in LR specifically focusing on question types but seem to still be getting a lot wrong even with BR. In addition, I have purchased the Loophole since many said the supplemental material helps a lot. I was just wondering on anyone's recommendations on how to study? (I can dedicate a majority of my time studying since I only work PT as well). (I also have not touched RC at all in cc yet) Should I work through the Loophole before continuing anymore drills on 7sage? Should I still try to go through LR and LG at the same time, or how should I work through both most effectively? Any and all advice much appreciated!!!

Could someone explain to me the difference between how to identify a valid versus a invalid forum. When I physically write out the concepts I do not understand how to identity (when written out or in my head) if it is valid of invalid. For example:

Most runners buy running shoes. R-->S

Most people who buy running shoes don't like to run. S --> /L

Some runners dont like to run.

This is my drawing

S

S (maybe its here too /L)

S/L

S/L

SR (maybe its here too /L)

SR

SR

R

R

My question is how to identity the scope. You can obviously say that there is a chance that there is no runners who do not like to run but there is also a chance that they do. How do I identity when it is in or out of the scope. I would really appreciate and explanation with examples .

https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/invalid-argument-form-6-of-7/?ss_completed_lesson=1151

I heard somewhere that RC drills are based on older PTs to keep the newer ones fresh

I heard somewhere else that older RCs are easier

Are the drills easier than the actual PT?

Is Josh's coming back to teach LG? He was extremely helpful with my understanding as I am prepping for the upcoming test.

Most of the questions I get wrong on RC are the Inference - Author's Perspective question type. Are there any tips/suggestions on how to approach these questions or things to pay extra attention to when reading through the passage or the ACs? Any insight would be greatly appreciated!

How do you guys do reading comprehension? I can't seem to get any strategies when tackling reading comprehension. I don't know how to get better and if it is even worth practicing since every passage is different? Any advice would be really helpful.

^^ title

Hi,

Could someone please help me with interpreting "except" in this sentence?

In order to encourage personal responsibility in adults, society should not restrict the performance of any of the actions of adults or interfere with the likely results except to prevent negative effects on others.

This short premise is originally from PT 69 Section 2 Q15. The way JY interprets except in the sentence is that "if there is interference, then it is to prevent negative effects on others". I understand this logical transition. However, in the syllabus, doesn't he say that "except" is a bi-conditional indicator? So, will we use "except" as a bi-conditional indicator here to translate the logic?

Thank you for the help!!!! I sincerely appreciate any helpful comments.

Admin Note: Edited title. For LR questions, please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

I drill each LR question type starting from "easiest". I don't move onto the next level difficulty until I get a perfect score on the drill. Once I get perfect scores on all drills of a given question type from "easiest" to "hardest" it would be really helpful if I could go back and retake all the ones I got wrong to make sure the concepts have been correctly solidified and I've made accurate progress. Would be great to add a feature to the drill filter where you can select "taken" and "got wrong". Thanks for considering! #feedback #request

I have a hard time when it comes down to picking out which piece of the argument is the subset or superset. When I drill I sometimes confuse the necessary for sufficient and vice versa. is there any advice anyone can give me not to do this?

I've been trying to find the substitution equivalence lessons here on 7sage after hearing JY mention it in a new videos, as well as people asking for the lessons in the comments. All the links in response to those comments requesting the video lessons lead me to empty pages without any videos or written explanations. Would someone be able to help me find those lessons? Thank you!

What are your recommendations for staying focused and engaged throughout the RC section. Especially when taking a PT. Thanks!

I need advice. I have only been studying for 2 months now but I am already starting to get worried. I have taken 2 PT's & have not finished LR either time, scoring with -15 on both. While I am not too far into CCV2 (still in foundations), I have not been challenged by something this much before, which I guess is threatening to me. I am unsure if it is the wordiness & my want to just have my eyes glaze over while reading the stimuli or if I truly am just not getting it.

I am currently a high school science teacher & my study schedule isn't what I would want it to be due to everything I have going on. My mental stamina is also low. HELP )':

🍪🍪🍪

I noticed a repeating pattern of argument structure that some may find useful. I call the form "Cost Benefit”, below I will discuss how it functions and why it matters.

The argument structure offers one benefit as a premise and concludes from this that the benefit is compelling to make a statement about the original “thing” being good overall.

Let me give an example:

The Dirt Devil vacuum cleaner has the most efficient suction system out of any vacuum on the market, moreover, the Dirt Devil is the most cost effective option on the market. Therefore if you are in the market for a vacuum, look no further than the Dirt Devil.

Here our premise holds 2 benefits (most efficient suction system, most cost effective) out to conclude that the Dirt Devil is the best to buy.

The assumption here and with every “Cost Benefit” argument is that there is not a cost being overlooked that outweighs these benefits.

So,

To Weaken such an argument: Introduce a cost that may outweigh the benefit

To Strengthen: Block out the possibility of potential costs, introduce another benefit, or emphasize the importance/relevance of the benefit.

Additionally, this argument structure is often used for Necessary Assumption questions. The NA simply stating something to the effect of: “The benefit is not outweighed by certain costs” or “The benefit is not unimportant to making a judgement about the original thing”.

The “Cost Benefit” argument also has another cookie cutter form. It uses a cost as a premise and then concludes that something is not good or we should not do something. This argument structure works the same way as the above one, except the assumption is that there is not an overriding benefit.

Cookie cutter arguments matter because patterns of reasoning are finite and LSAC re uses many of the same forms, just dressed up with confusing subject matter. For example to make a “Cost Benefit” argument more difficult, they may make the subject matter abstract or create an argument that makes perfect sense intuitively.

Boiling questions down to empirical structure is like distilling their blue prints and from there you can think about how new questions may spawn from them. Hopefully this is helpful, if so I will make some similar posts in the future!

Hey Everyone! I've only been studying for a few weeks and decided to apply what I learned from 7Sage about quantifiers to all/most/some practice problems in the LSAT Trainer. I'm stumped on one question and would very much appreciate it if someone would be able to map it out for me logically.

The passage is: "Most of the dishes at Oldie’s Diner are unhealthy, and most are offered on special during lunchtime. The dishes on special come with the customer’s choice of free fries or a free soda. All of the dishes offered on special are written up on the restaurant’s chalkboard."

The question is whether "Most of the dishes on the chalkboard are on special" can be true.

No matter how I go about the question using formal logic, I only ever arrive at some dishes written on the chalkboard are on special (Written-Chalkboard (--- s ---) On Special). Thanks in advance studious future attorneys!

I posted a q on the thread for PT32 S3 G2 here https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-32-section-3-game-2/

It asks

"Any one of the following could be true about the organizer's selection of works EXCEPT"

It's an in and out game. The answer choices give a partial list of what's in and are asking if the combination could be true. I'm confused because [I thought] when they ask what could be in, we're looking at a comprehensive list, rather than partial list--so it really threw me. I scavenged the comment section and no one else seemed to get tripped up so clearly this is me 😅

-Can someone explain how you knew the AC's were partial?

-Would you say this is a unique q or naw common get a grip

Reply here or directly on the question thread! tysm!

will lsat be harder after they remove logic games. if so should i do it before they change it?

what is the best skill for time management in the RC section?

So I just bought the subscription to use the logic games drilling but im not sure how it works. I am using preptest 1-50 for drilling and preptests 51- for actual practice tests. I just want to know how to select only 1-50 for my drilling and have it pick random ones with no specific game type.

I've been studying now for 10months and do not see much of the improvement.

Comparing to what it felt like 10 months ago when I first started to study, it was very difficult to understand the passages as well as the answer choices, and comprehending took so much time. I was always short in time by 5~10 minutes when I do the time section on LR(getting -7 ~ -14wrong).

Now, I feel more familiar with the LR passages, sometimes see the pattern and most of the time able to solve 1~2 star questions quickly and some of 4~5 star questions easy, and I am now able to finish timed section roughly in time.

But I don't see much of the apparent improvement and keep getting -8 and sometimes -12 if I was unable to focus and distracted. I will be very happy if I could get less than 3wrong consistently.

I am so devastated. Is this normal? Any advice will be very appreciated.

Hello All,

I have taken the LSAT a number of times, and most of the time my score is unsatisfactory in comparison to what I had been PTing. Most recently, I scored a low 160 when I had been averaging 170+ the last 7 or so PTs previously. Any advice on what I could be doing wrong?

LG I have down to -0 and RC I know I can improve. I think most of the issue is LR, where I feel like the questions I PT are so much different (and easier) than the ones that show up on the real exam. I don't strictly recreate exam day conditions during PT, but maybe even less than ideal conditions (people walking around, visual/audio distractions, etc.) and yet I still do well on PTs and not on the official exam.

Any help is greatly appreciated, thanks y'all

Can someone explain why E is correct? I feel like B should be the best answer...

Admin Note: Edited title.