I'm very confused as to why the answer is B and not C. Looking back at it now, I'm trying to make justifications for why the answer should be B (EX: B says "the government would withhold" which is not as definitive as in C which says "the government would deny requests"). Is it not C because C is too broad and is not focusing on UFOs specifically? I figured its broad language was why it was the correct answer but maybe that was not the right way to go about it.

Anybody know of any lessons or have any advice on sets vs supersets? Feeling discouraged by PT 89. Q's 9 & 22 are mainly the ones I just want a deeper dive on.

I'm not sure that JY has covered sets vs supersets more broadly in a video but figured i'd ask if anybody knew. TIA!

Offering help to people struggling with Logical Reasoning. Reach out.

I have been studying LG consistently for the past five months. I finished the entire LG core curriculum, foolproofing every single game along the way. I have also foolproofed about 6 LG sections. I always watch explanation videos after doing games and repeat the game until perfect. I also feel comfortable with the LG foundations - on blind review I consistently get -0 to -1. But on fresh timed LG sections, I can barely make it through two games. I am truly not sure what I'm doing wrong and find this to be extremely demoralizing. I would appreciate any advice!

have you ever heard an lsat prepbook describe a negative sufficient condition as a "denial of the antecedent" or an illegal negation described as "affirmation of the consequent"? Ever heard a book mention the latin modus tollens? ponens?

i have not. ever.

the lsat prep books seem to give these concepts different names and designations. However, as i got more interested in conditional logic and formal logic concepts (as a result of lsat studying), i stumbled upon an old book called "A System of Logic" by John Stuart Mill (1843). Mill's book seems to take a look at LSAT logic concepts (provided by the lsat prepbooks ) in a much more formal way, giving the concepts more complicated names, introducing different symbols for propositional statements etc.

my question is this : do the lsat prep books SIMPLIFY mill's book? or is mill's book a more THOROUGH version of the lsat prepbooks? furthermore, could mill's book be used as a complete substitute to some of the lsat prepbooks, helping students save money on prepbooks and ultimately providing a better logical foundation than the prepbooks could provide anyway?

let me know what you think, thanks.

.

Just got my score back after taking it a second time. The first time I took it was with the LSAT Flex during Covid. I do not remember my score but I definitely cancelled it. Anyways, I got my score back today and I scored a 135 (big yikes). Mind you, I have scored on practice tests in the high 150s so I was really surprised. I have college applications due soon. But I'm currently an immigration paralegal who works full time. I'm hoping that my 4 years of immigration law experience, GPA, personal statements, and recommendation letters from mentors and lawyers I currently work with will have some law schools overlook my score. I'm also applying to 10 schools in hope that at least ONE school will take me. My score does not define me. But also at the same time, highly contemplating to take the next test in April.

HELP!!! Any advice is highly appreciated :)

Why did this happen???

So I'm taking the LSAT in February, and I am hopeful to at least score in the 150s there, however in order to get into the Law School I am thinking of getting into, I would have to score anything above 165ish. Is that jump possible? If so what tips or tricks do you all recommend?

I am trying to fine tune my LR, and most advice i see is to study the questions types you struggle with, but after looking over my analytics all the LR questions I'm getting wrong are pretty evenly distributed between all question types.

My consistently wrong answers are the ones that are ranked as 4-5 level difficulty. What exactly should I do for that? Just take drill sets of hard questions over and over and over?

Hello, looking to help some people struggling to achieve their goals for the LR section. Message me!

Hi everyone!

I have been using 7Sage for the past 2 months I feel as though I have improved with all of the syllabus curriculum so far. However, I find myself REALLY struggling with higher difficulty weaken/flaw questions. I really need help or tips as I feel stuck even with the materials currently provided, and I think I need a push to get me past my plateau with these question types!

Thanks and please #help :)

Hi! I signed up to take the LSAT in June. But, that leaves me to study for 4 months. I feel like it won't be enough time. I have been feeling very stressed. I wanted to matriculate in law school by Fall 2024, but I feel that I won't have time. I also have been working on my PS and have been trying to finish it. I have a fee waiver, and don't know if I should withdraw the exam until I feel prepared. I want to score over a 170 on the LSAT. Also, I will be looking for full-time jobs since I am a recent college grad. I don't know if the Fall 2025 year would be better to matriculate in. I I'm in the intro to logic section of the study schedule and it is confusing. I want to know if I can skip to reading comprehension then come back to logic.

I'm feeling really hopeless when it comes to logic games. I'm still only able to really get -3 on new sections within the time constraints. I feel like I've been working on logic games for such a long time and I'm just curious how long it took others to prefect their score? Really need a high LSAT score to balance out my low GPA so it's not an option to be getting anything worse than -1/-0 on this section.

I’m wondering how can I decide a question tag, such as “INF” “RecS” “AppP”, on my own? Can I tell directly based on the question or do I have to look at answer choices?

Does anyone know any study videos or articles for such relevant topics on differentiating different tags/structures?

Thank you!

Hey! Does anyone know when/how we will be able to sign up for our date/time with ProctorU for the February exam? I haven't gotten an email yet and just want to make sure I didn't miss anything!

What are peoples strategies for marking up a passage?

Do you use the different highlight colors + the underline tool for different, specific types of information?

I've just started studying RC and am trying to come up with as system for marking up passages that makes it easier to go back and find info when I'm on the questions. I am curious as to what worked for others.

As of now, all I have is that I am going to underline time indicators. (Such as: before, after, until recently, now, back then, previously, etc.)

I know some people feel like it could be a time suck, but I have such a hard time being engaged with the passages I think using the tools will make me actively think about what information falls into what category and how it all fits together. I'd love others' input on this as well.

"If you study, you will beat the LSAT." This is an example given here on 7sage, and it seems to work. Studying is a sufficient condition to beat the LSAT (apparently). S -> B

On another website, an example was given along the lines of: "If I put gas in my car, my car will run." And, here, putting gas in the car was said to be the necessary condition. The car needs gas to run. Gas is necessary for the car to run. CR -> G

But in that example, IF introduces the necessary condition, not the sufficient condition. What am I not understanding exactly? Does IF introduce sufficient conditions or necessary conditions? Huge thanks in advance!

Need help with this question. Understanding it was a little hard.

Someone tell me if I'm correct in this logic. This is for question #2. Here is the link.

https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/quiz-on-finding-sufficient-assumptions-with-intersection-statements-2-answers/?ss_completed_lesson=11895

G –m→ N

G –m→ /A

G-m->N-m->/A = I’m not able to draw it out like how JY does so this is what I put however, on paper I draw it out like JY does.

N—>/A = Answer

So in regards to N-m->/A not being the answer, let me explain.

/A

/A

GN

GN

GN/A

GN/A

G/A

G/A

N/A

N/A

Now the reason N-m->/A is incorrect is because this answer would effect the conclusion. Say you had more A’s and more N’s then it wouldn’t be the case that G-m->/A is the answer because look, I have more A’s and N’s that are not G’s so how could G –m→ /A? This would make the conclusion invalid. It has to be certain that most G’s are /A and by getting ride of N-m->/A statement were getting ride of the extra two N’s that carry A with it as well as the other extra two /A’s. If N-m->/A then how does G-m->/A work? Out of the 6 N’s, two are A which pulls from the conclusion by saying, “No, G-m->/A invalid because we have two extra A’s therefore out of all the A’s which is 8 (100%) only 4 G’s are A’s and it needs to be 5 to count for most. The N-m->/A is satisfied but doesn’t allow the conclusion to be valid so the sufficient assumption that N—>/A makes it 100% true that yes G –m→ /A.

GN

GN

GN/A

GN/A

G/A

G/A

Does anyone have an explanation for why the answer wouldn't be A? Thanks!

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

I was wondering when it is appropriate to start foolproofing logic games? I went through each kind of game (actually through blueprint's curriculum, but I really disliked Blueprint's explanations, so I just signed up for 7sage). I have a general feel for each kind of game but am still not great and below average at LG.

I plan to start foolproofing the games from tests 1-35 (aim to do 1 or 2 a day) and on the side continue drilling with 7sage a few games a day (not necessarily foolproofing).

Does anyone have any input?

I've been struggling with MSS questions, so I drill every day. I would love someone's explanation of why D is correct. I chose B. I find myself I think making assumptions instead of taking everything I need for my answer from the stimulus. Along with this, any strategies for MSS questions??? Thank you!!!

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

Reasoning structure currently seems like an abstract idea when it comes to reading comprehension. My goal is to make it more of a practical understanding, kind of like how I understand diagramming in logic games.

I am starting to think of looking at reasoning structure for a reading comprehension passage similar to how I look at a method of reasoning question on logical reasoning. This seems to help, but need to practice this more with passages.

Any insight on I can transition my understanding of reasoning structure from something abstract to more of a practical understanding?

Is there a explanation video for this question, I was not able to find it.