Questions or games(75.3 for example) that require you to manipulate a complete sequencing chain really slow me down. Does anybody have any tips or know of any games so I can drill them?.

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-75-section-4-game-3/

So phenomenon - El Niño - is expected to increase in coming years and this thing causes HEAVY WINTER RAINFALL in T.

Conclusion: Average rodent population in T will increase in the coming years.

WHY: Because rodent populations normally increase during LONG periods of suatainsmd rain.

Hope this layout helps you see that the author is probably either assuming that long periods of rain will occur with heavy winter rainfall or that heavy winter rainfall will cause these long periods of rain.

A. UM ok? this doesn't really appear to do anything to the argument

B. Ok but we know there is going to be heavy rain doesn't really hurt the argument.

C. Ok so I think you can't take other situations which are clearly not the same as T to be indicative of what is going to happen in T. Maybe to have more rodents you need the perfect variables which T is going to have thus our argument still stands.

D*. In T winters marked by HEAVY rainfall (the one that's going to be caused by El Niño normally does not mean that LONG periods of rain occur. This hurts the argument a lot, because it pretty much says "yea we are going to see a lot of heavy rain with this phenomenon but it actually rarely occurs for long periods meaning it probably (rains and stops....) which means we probably won't see an increase of rodents.

E. (Was very confused with this one) But this just requires to many assumptions

The global warming caused by air pollution (the same sufficient conditions for El Niño) is going to produce a large number of effects that could affect rodent populations.

Ok for E to weaken you need to assume that these effects are going to affect our rodents in T, also you need to assume they are going to be bad effects and not let them increase the average of rodents. What if the effects make them super human NYC type rodents, what if its a positive affect for rodents and actually increases them more.

Ok so pretty much X 50 ppl

Y has 100 ppl

X 1 person hospitalized

Y has 4 ppl hospitalized

So initially I thought this doesn't really seem like a paradox but wtv, lets just explain why Y has more hospital patients.

A. Ok if preventive health programs are more common X than in Y that'll explain why Y has more people in hospitals.

B. (I was between this and D just because I couldn't eliminate D) This actually explains the phenomena though. If city X is a leader in outpatient treatment whenever possible that explains why they have less hospitalizations they just send everyone home.

C. Perfect the drinking water of Y has DANGEROUSLY high toxins compared to that of X so that could cause more people to be sick and end up in hospitals

D*: (Read carefully) The hospitals in Y are of high quality and X ppl are sent there for treatment. Ok just because X people are sent there let's say to get the pain medication that wouldn't explain why Y has more hospital patients. They could just go get the medication and leave.

E. Fair assumption to make that if stress is correlated with higher hospitalizations

Does anyone know why B is not right for q11? Thanks :)

I'm having so much trouble with finding flaws in LR. I feel like my NA and Flaw questions are suffering because of it. Can anyone explain to me their process when trying to find flaws?

Who reviews the explanations for LR questions that you get correct? I'd like to do it. I've read that it helps cement good reasoning. But there's just so many that it takes up tons of time. I always review the explanations for the questions that I get incorrect.

Taking the Feb LSAT and I don't know if I am on a good track.

I can do the questions pretty well (untimed) but with time I am rushing and getting the questions wrong or I am not able to complete all the questions without guessing. My main issue is just time. Idk how to approach the MBF/MBT questions without freaking out which causes me to lose more time.

In a 4 question LG drill I’m -2 easy. Throw an in out game and I’m useless.

Can someone point to the exact LR lessons I need to complete the in out games? Eventually I need to complete all of LR but I just want to knock out LG fully and just drill daily to keep the skills.

Hello, I posted a comment on someone's previous post on this question, but because it was from 3 months ago, I wanted to bump with my own post.

I got the answer correct, and I can explain why I thought C was correct, but I couldn't fully prove why A was incorrect. I could eliminate B, D, and E, because the stimulus does not mention what conditions would determine whether someone deserves praise or is worthy of it. The stimulus only mentions whether which treatment is more worthy.

In regards to C) Only what is subject to a person's choice should be used in measuring the praiseworthiness of that person, the stimulus mentions that a person cannot choose to have feelings. Therefore, the ethicist's argument that one's treatment is more worthy of praise if it is at least partially motivated by feelings of compassion means they did not have choice in the matter of having those feelings. So C cannot be true.

For A, the reason why I personally did not choose this answer, is because the stimulus states that treatment that is entirely motivated by cold and dispassionate concern for moral obligation is less worthy of praise- I was unsure if 'cold and dispassionate concern' could still be categorized as feelings, even if it is slightly described as lack thereof. Still, I couldn't completely eliminate this answer.

I'm not sure if my reasoning is correct- could someone confirm? Thank you so much!

Can someone explain the reasoning of this prompt? I chose A) - wrong asnwer but blind reviewing it, I understand it as being partially agreeable to the to the overall argument.

LR- PTB.S1.Q1

Misread the question and u was stuck between two answer choices that I thought would be correct. I need to understand the main point for this question because it can lead to tricky answer choices.

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

Hey What can I do? I bought the LIVE 7Sage subscription but I can't do anything with it because I do not have the upgraded Law Hub account. I'm registered for the Feb LSAT and I'm losing time. I applied for the Fee waiver and was denied. I do not know what else to do.

Does anybody have tips on how to improve on RC? I typically get like -14 or -16 on this section and doing low res has helped but when the passage is difficult / under timed conditions, it does not seem to help me at all. I would greatly appreciate any help!

I have been doing fairly well on logical reasoning and reading comprehension sections, however, when it comes to logic games I can't seem to grasp the concepts. It feels as though there is some fundamental aspect of logic games that hasn't clicked yet and once it does it will all make sense. What I struggle with the most is setting up game boards. It takes me so long to just answer one question and I'm still left confused and unconfident by the end of the question. Does anyone have any advice on how to get better at logic games?

hey i have a question

lets say there is a logic game with a rule stating "j is number 2" should we still write that rule or only put it into our setup of the game because it is a dead rule. im asking because if there is a rule question at the beginning of the game it would be easier to get rid of the wrong answers by just looking through the written out rules that you have instead of having to look at both the setup and the written out rules

I usually score anywhere from -2 to -1 on RC sections, and I've recently started scoring much worse (-6, -4, etc.). Any insight as to what's going on would be much appreciated!

PT94 - S4 - Q10

Is the solution D, because the stimulus does not mention which hospitals the patients are residing in? So even though one particular patient from City X is medevac'd to the hospital in City Y they are still considered a City X patient? Thus that is not a reason that City X has 1/4th of the patients of City Y?

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

[I am posting on behalf of a 7Sage user:]

Can you go through and explain I am really confused I think PT 1 S3 Q07 has answer mistake.

The last sentence says that there is more male duck in the old duck ration compared to young duck ration with the female duck, which means more male in OD: FD compared to YD:FD.

After stating that they are saying that NOW we can infer that if there is more disparity b/w two sexes M: F the more the adult male ducks will be.

it is like saying that there are two liquids A AND B in both A and B there are three components 1,2, 4

( 1,2 both belong to the same group so lets say 1+2=3 )

now they have given us a ratio of 3:4 for both A and B and said that 3 is more in quantity than 4

but we know 3 has two components 1, 2 and they have also given us quantity comparison of 1,2,4 they are saying 1 has less quantity gap with 4 means if we add 1 into one flask and 4 into another flask they will look filled nearly the same, but if we compare 2 and 4 in quantity 2 is much more than 4

now they are saying we can use this for all so whenever 3 increases 2 will increase in greater proportion than 1 because the ratio of 2 is more compared to 4 means there are many 2 compared to 4 than there are 1 compared to 4,

A/B= west/east

1=young male 2 =old male 3=1+2 (all male)

4= total female

For the questions that ask: "The argument's REASONING is flawed because...", would the right answer choice explain why the support structure is flawed?

Alternatively, for questions that ask: "The argument is flawed because...", would the right answer choice explain why the conclusion is flawed?

Need help clarifying

Hi I was wondering if anyone knows when the August '24 LSAT test dates will be posted or if there would an august one available?

I was wondering how I should attack/understand this question?

It asks if it discusses the relationship between the reliability and one of the AC's. What does relationship mean in this case? Is the question asking if the passage mentions some sort of a connection between the reliability and one of the answer choices?

Thank you.

Would someone be able to explain to me why C is incorrect?

Can someone help me understand how we can infer [A]? It says that officers deviating from cognitive interview techniques is problematic because it might make the cognitive interview less effective. I eliminated it because although the author suggests that officers deviating from the cognitive interview techniques is problematic, they doesn't say why it's problematic. And then the answer choice infers that it's problematic because of decreased effectiveness. I eliminated it because we don't know if that's the reason... it could be problematic for other reasons.

How is it an acceptable inference?

for the people who have gone through cc already/ high accumlative score::

when tackling the lessons in cc, what would be the best approach with the games provided as examples. Would it be best to:

try the questions on your own THAN watch through the explanation videos;

work through them simultaneously (doing it at the same time);

or work game one simultaneously, then for the other games in that type try the questions on your own THAN watch through the explanation videos

i literally just downloaded this for specifically lg and a little bit lost in regards of what method is most rewarding, i am a very visual learner, however i am severely stubborn and insist on always teaching myself material and since i was a kid in gymnastics, have a very hard time - refuse almost, i reject it - allowing others to teach me. but doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results, just like einstien said is insanity. ive already done the whole lsat trainer book, when practicing games i rarely miss more than three, but i develop extreme methodological issues when i dont know what the "correct" first step is or if its not being assigned. i have no methods for games rn besides the game board which i feel as thought i am as close as you can get in "mastering" them. even with my my time on exam day, the time i spend wondering how i should start my approach, etc, is where majority of my seconds go.

so swallowing my pride and forcing myself to allow help, which i am doing good so far and havent ran into any rejecting but i am now stuck in a block for the past hours, bc adhd and not knowing the correct first step for a task makes me feel like im walking through cobwebs in minecraft, getting no where. without knowing the correct step to take - however i know in this instance there is no right answer and it is all your personal learning prefs but wont do trial and error without knowing it has worked for someone before - i cant start until i find out what it is, which i have been looking for myself and failed to find for the past hours. which is no surprise i have waited to finally ask for help now at 6 in the morning after searching for 5 hours, my final resort.

i do have severe adhd if you couldnt tell from a one sentence question becoming an essay, if that is important, im open to trying literal anything.

i would literally love nothing more if someone pls gave me any sort of guidance/suggest a plan they used/how to figure out what i should do because adhd and ocd wont let me go to sleep until i figure it out and i am so tired. thank you in advance

When one of the rules are:

if A is selected then B and C are also selected

so A--> B and C

if you negate(Not select) JUST ONE of B or C not both, does A also get not selected or do both B and C have to be not selected for A not to be selected? For In Out Games