Does every real test have a comparative passage? I cannot seem to recall

In PT12.S2.Game 3, we have a rule that goes:

Mendel does not buy any kind of food that Nastassia buys.

JY, in his explanation video, drew the Lawgic as:

M --> /N

Why is it not /M --> N or N --> /M

Could you please help?

Hello, I have realized that there are certain questions on Reading Comprehension that do not have an explanation. For example the video would jump from question 14 to question 16 without any reference to question 15. Does anybody know the reason for that? thank you!

Hey guys, the October lsat is going to be the first lsat i'm going to take. I don't think I'm going to score very high on it :( and i'm thinking of just signing up for the November lsat right now. Is that possible? or is there like a rule that you have to wait a certain amount of time before taking another one?

Thanks!

Hi everyone, I got this question right, but I wanted to make sure I diagrammed it correctly.

Premise: little psych discomfort in admitting flaw in casual conversation --> trivial

(since you experience little psych discomfort when admitting a flaw ONLY IF you consider that flaw to be trivial)

Conclusion: admit flaw in casual conversation --> trivial

Correct answer (missing "bridge"): admit flaw in casual conversation --> little psych discomfort in admitting flaw in casual conversation

I was confused b/c on another forum, they diagrammed the stimulus as a biconditional: trivial (--) little psych discomfort

and I could not see how the wording of the stimulus results in a biconditional.

Thanks in advance!

#help

Hi, I will be taking my very first LSAT in October.

I am trying to adjust my PT schedule to the actual test time, but I cannot find the exact time of the exam.

Does anybody know how the time slots are going to be like on ProctorU? Is it going to be in the morning/afternoon?

Thank you!

Hello everyone. I was hoping to see if I could get some tips for in-out games. I’m currently going through the CC on it and honestly, many of the explanations are just confusing me even further and feel overdone. I’m really struggling the most with the “harder” and “hardest”difficulty level in-out games. I just cant finish these on time at all despite being able to go back during BR to get most of the answers right. My main problem is knowing when to divide the game board into separate worlds/translating some of the rules/knowing when they’re activated or not. Should I just keep drilling these games until I get faster or is there something else that I am missing? If someone could drop some tips on how to improve at this I’d greatly appreciate it!

I can consistently get -3/4 on LR and RC, but I struggle with getting less than 2 wrong. My goal is 170+ so the difference between missing 3 vs missing 2 per section matters. When I blind review, I never seem to realize what I did to get the answer wrong, I only understand after seeing the explanation. Usually its very minor things such as a word that makes the answer less strong, or maybe the right answer was just stronger. Regardless, I know there has to be some way to get better and I am stuck. Any tips?

I'm struggling on how to foolproof previous LGs. For example I'm trying to redo a sequencing LG from PT32 section 3 game 3. I'm trying to create drills and I am unable to find that exact LG to add to my drill. Could someone help me out?

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-42-section-3-passage-2-questions/

What's wrong with (C)?

"inner turmoil" suggests that the work was concerned with emotion, and Lichtenstein was rebelling against the fading emotional power of abstract art (lines 28-30)

"bold lines/primary colors" suggests that the work utilized pop art techniques, a movement that Lichtenstein was definitely a part of

How do you guys each approach an RC passage while reading? Do you do the memory method every time or write down a low-res summary? I'm averaging -7 and would like to be down to -3! (And ideally take less time doing it) Thank you!

Starting to stress out because my scores are regressing and October LSAT is exactly a month away. Scored 170 once and haven't been able to since, ranging between 164-169, 163 being the worst in the last few months. My original aim was 175 (aiming for T-14 schools) but after studying for more than a year, I'm just so tired. I feel like I have made so much progress in terms of understanding the test but my scores do not reflect this (although I scored 158 last two real exams so not reverting back to 150s is a good sign I guess). I am lowering my goal to 170 which is not a low score by any means but I'm afraid T-14 will not be possible for me with anything lower than this. What can I do to make sure I am able to score this on the real thing?

I think my main problem is not knowing what to do after BR and going through the wrong answers. I BR thoroughly and my BR scores are almost always in the mid-170s (although for PT 90 this past week was 168). I watch the explanations for questions I missed and I was unsure about. However, what do I do next? I have tried writing in the wrong answer journal the way to approach missed questions but I don't think they have helped. I take one test every Saturday and BR thoroughly but maybe I'm not doing the necessary studying and drilling the days between those PTs. The day I take the test should be the least hectic day, correct? At the moment, it feels like the most. How should I be studying or drilling on the days I'm not taking a PT? Should I go back to fundamentals, drill a question type or passage or take full section tests every day? Maybe I'm not taking enough section tests (I take maybe one or two the whole week) because whenever I start the full PT, it feels like oh shit what do I do now so maybe the section tests would be helpful in establishing good habits under timed conditions.

It feels like I am nearing the finish line but haven't achieved remotely what I set out to. Please help, any and all advice appreciated!

Is the answer choice of a NA question supposed to be a necessary assumption only between premises and conclusion or it can also be a necessary assumption between premises?

Yesterday I took the real thing and it was rough. I only started studying at the end of July, so I know I need much more practice, but I am just really discouraged because I want to apply for fall 2023 and I am afraid my lsat score won’t be enough to go where I want. I could apply next year, but I don’t want to wait two whole years to attend law school. I am going to retake in November, but that’s still not much time. Not sure if this is the right path for me

Hello everyone! Was hoping to see if those who average -5 or less on any average LR section can drop some tips that we can all learn from! :) What can help someone averaging minus 7-10 bridge that gap to -5 or less?

STATEMENT 1: "A work of architecture, if it is to be both inviting and **functional...

inviting + functional for public use --> ~obtrusive

contrapositive: obtrusive --> ~inviting or ~functional for public use

STATEMENT 2: "Modern architects, plagued by egoism...

We are thus told that modern architects (because they let their strong personalities take over their work) are producing buildings that are not functional for public use.

Answer choice B states that "modern architects who let their strong personalities take over their work produce buildings that are not unobtrusive." In other words, they produce obtrusive buildings.

The stimulus tells us that modern architects are producing buildings that are not functional for public use. We know from the contrapositive of the first statement that if a building is obtrusive, then it is either not inviting or it is not functional for public use. Does it follow that a building that is not functional for public use is obtrusive? No it does not: that would constitute a mistaken reversal of the conditional statement.

Please #help

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of question." Also, removed the portions of the stimulus as posting the entire stimulus on the Forum is not allowed. See our Forum Rules here: https://classic.7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/15.

I was revisiting some old PTs and stumbled across this question. It's giving me quite the headache. JY's explanation doesn't help at all because he assumes that the amount of correctly addressed but damaged mail is a small subset of correctly addressed mail. But where does this inference come from? It could very well be that all correctly addressed mail is damaged. I don't believe there's any reasonable basis to assume that only a minority of correctly addressed mail is damaged.

I believe most other explanations for this question claim the existence of the binary of correctly addressed mail and incorrectly addressed mail as the main reason why there must be a significant amount of incorrectly addressed mail. However, I don't believe this binary is of any significance because the stimulus gives us a way for these two groups to overlap via correctly addressed mail that is damaged. Since we know nothing about the respective sizes of the two groups, this scenario should be plausible:

1000 total mail

800=correctly addressed

200=incorrectly addressed

700=damaged

Thus, most mail arrives three or more business days after being sent.

As shown above, I believe the existence of this overlap makes it such that D is a "could be true." Now, if there was no overlap, then D must be true. But as stated above, without any information about the respective sizes of each group, we can't conclude anything.

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-20-section-4-question-19/

PT62.S4.Q9 - If a mother's first child is born...

Explanation Video: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-62-section-4-question-09/

All 40 of John's friends know someone who has smoked 40 cigs for 40 years who is also very fit and well and John does NOT know anyone like this, yet he knows he is NOT unique. The correct answer is E, some of John's friends are not telling the truth. However, if John is NOT unique, wouldn't that mean that the majority of his friends also do not know someone who has smoked 40 cigs for 40 years who is also very fit and well. Since he is NOT unique, wouldn't that entail that he is not a rarity among the group that does not know someone like this? And the majority do not as well, since he is not a unique case. What am I missing here? Am I overthinking or putting too much importance on the word choice of "unique"?

I've managed to get my reading speed down to 4:00 - 4:30 seconds, however, when it comes to answering questions it still takes me about a minute to get through some and I end up going over the target time by about a minute to a minute and a half because of this fact. How can I improve on the timing I have for questions

Does anyone know when the scores for the Lsat I just took rn(September 10th 2022) will come out?

I keep looking this up and can't find one concrete response. You can complete the writing sample after the exam correct? It just could delay your score?

Posting this again in the discussions to gain more traction because I'm really not understanding this one.

This question still doesn't sit right with me, and I find the explanations to be less than sufficient even after perusing the comments. The stimulus provides us with this condition: to produce the rankings of how easy it is to do business within a country, the World Bank assesses how difficult it is for a hypothetical business to comply with regulations and pay taxes. However, we don't know what factors are in play when assessing the difficulty of compliance. The premise that follows provides a semblance of an answer to that by saying that the government has dramatically simplified tax filing for small and even midsized businesses, leading us to the assumption that simplifying tax filing lessens the difficulty of regulation compliance, therefore leading to another assumption that businesses will comply with regulations more if the simplification of tax filing reduces the difficulty of complying with regulations. I believe that's reasonable. The conclusion then says that the country's ranking will improve, further supporting that second assumption. With this line of thought, here is how I approached the questions.

A) Completely useless. Who cares about the rate at which new businesses are formed?

B) This directly plays off the assumption I made while reading the stimulus. If the simplification of tax filing decreased the difficulty of regulation compliance, then more businesses would comply with regulations. If the answer to the question B poses is no, then the minister's conclusion doesn't stand because the simplification didn't make it easier to comply with regulations. If the answer is yes, then the conclusion works.

C) We see this type of answer choice all the time. Who cares about other regulations? We're looking specifically at one type of effort that can be made to decrease the difficulty of regulation compliance. Even if tax filing was the most trivial of tasks, it would still lessen the difficulty of complying with regulations. Useless answer.

D) I don't understand why we need to care about the size of the business mentioned in the stimulus. Are small and midsized businesses not businesses? The conditions for assessment deal with hypothetical businesses. Small and midsized businesses are businesses so they should be included when considering businesses in general. I feel like you can use much of the same reasoning for answer choice C to get rid of D. Even if the midsized business was smaller than the hypothetical business, given that it still is a business, why can it not be used as a comparative point? Why does size matter at all in this scenario?

E) Useless.

Update: This is what was shared with me

Suggested RC: PT 68 P3, 74 P4, 80 P1, 82 P3, 83 P4, 87 P4, 61 P3, 67 P3, 82 P3, 40 P3, 50 P4, 77 P4, 85 P2, 86 P4, 67 P4, 81 P2M 85 P1, 87 P3.

Suggest LR: PT 83, 81, 78, 89, 86, 85 (Most important) , 70 (Hardest LR)

Suggested LG:

a. Grouping: PT 28 G3, 39 G2, 48 G3, 81 G4, 83 G1 + 3

b. Circular: PT 41 G4

c. Mapping: PT 79 G4

d. Pattern: PT 72 G4, 80 G4

e. Grouping/Linear Combo: PT 64 G4, 82 G3

f. Basic Linear: PT 78 G3, 82 G2, 86 G3

g. Advanced Linear: PT 37 G1 + 4, 76 G3, 83 G4, 87 G3

h. For Seq Elements: PT 75 G3, 84 G1

Suggested Full-Test Practice Tests: PT 89, 90, 91, 92

Hope this helps :)

I am looking for any recommendations and alterations of my strategy I came up with.

I am going to drill 15 questions of easiest-medium difficulty and try to complete before the target time. I want to give myself more time for the hard questions, so I want to be able to get easy questions done as quickly as possible.

I was also thinking of putting the question stems that I have the most difficulty in for the drills. I believe this will allow me to practice for said questions while increasing my speed.