I’m interested!

I’m interested!

Ok I think I've wrapped my head around the concept, but just to clarify with the two statements:

Students are cited as "late" only if they arrive more than five minutes past the last ring of the homeroom bell.

In this example, what follows only if is the necessary condition, whereas "Students are cited as "late" is the sufficient condition.

C → +5

So, just because you meet the necessary condition (arriving more than 5 minutes), doesn't necessarily mean that you will be cited. But if you meet the sufficient condition (Cited as late) then you must have met the necessary condition.

Students are cited as "late" if they arrive more than five minutes past the last ring of the homeroom bell.

In this example, the sufficiency and necessity are FLIPPED, so "Students being cited as "late" is the necessary condition, whereas what follows "if" is the sufficient condition.

+5 → C

So, that is why if a premise was given stating that "Zack was cited as late", you cannot infer that it must have been because he was 5+ late, but if the premise was "Zack was 5+ late" you can infer that he would be cited (because he meets the sufficient condition).

But let me know if I am wrong or am confusing something!

For 1.6, the "Unless you brush your teeth, you'll get cavities" if the premise was "John didn't get cavities" could you infer that John brushed his teeth?

Doing the conditional translations, I got "If you don't brush your teeth, you'll get cavities" and "If you do not get cavities, then your brush your teeth."

I understand that brush teeth does not guarantee that you can't receive a cavity (because that would confuse sufficient for necessity), but if you meet the necessity, can you infer that it is because of the sufficient condition?

So to understand the Kumar example a bit more, saying that someone would be cited as 'late' only if they arrive more than 5 min... does that mean that there could be other possible explanations why Kumar would not be cited as late even if he was 5 minutes late? For example, he could have a note or have given the teacher notice that he would be late and so it doesn't mean that him arriving more than 5 minutes late is necessary for him to be cited as late?

So just to clarify, if a conditional statement has the word "must" in it, does that indicate the necessary condition? For example, consider this statement: "If I go to the store, then it must be Tuesday." So applying Lawgic, it would translate to S → T or /T → /S. So it is something that is required in order for the condition to become true?

I like them, however when I click on one of the bubbles, I think it would be more helpful if it redirected you to the question/answers for that type instead of just disappearing.

First, don't be discouraged!! The LSAT is hard and when you're learning so much material it can be quite overwhelming. I would like to start by saying my diagnostic when I started this June was a 146. After completing the foundations (mainly ALL of the argument/grammar lessons), my score went up to a 150 and I am currently at a 154. My suggestion is to really focus on learning the fundamentals, practice the grammar parsing and argument lessons and drills because it REALLY helps. Yes, it's a grind to complete and you want to get right into drilling/PT taking the various sections, but you really need to understand the fundamentals first before you start taking Practice Tests, especially because they are so very limited. I hope this helps and please keep pushing through! You can do it.

When it comes to doing these drills, especially initially after getting through the RC Critique passages only, should we not worry about the timing aspect just yet and focus on understanding/implementing the techniques that were gone over in the lessons? I find myself getting stressed trying to finish in approx. 8 min per passage and end up not understanding as much.

@ thank you so much for your very kind words, I'll try keeping my mind off it in the meantime and hopefully I did better than I'm thinking but if not, I'm just going to get right back up and try again and focus on weak areas.

@ yes, it was my very first time taking the exam. I've been studying for 6 months and had been doing decently in the preptests but I honestly feel like I blacked out during the exam but I just don't think I did well. But you're right, and also I can always retake it and just focus on areas that I felt weak on but I won't stress about it too much now.

@ Yeah, that's exactly how i was feeling. I was doing alright in my preptests (155-158) but the actual test felt significantly harder in my opinion and it's really discouraging because I have been studying for 6 months. But you're right, we should stay positive and even if we don't end up getting the score we want at least we took the exam and did our best.

So the good news is that I only got three wrong out of two passages! The bad news is that it took me 30 minutes but it was the first time I tried practicing the passage methods explained in previous lessons, so I can only get faster from here!

6/6! Took me forever though but for my first drill, I'm proud of it! Definitely need to keep working on my low-res summaries and practicing getting better at them.

So for these purpose questions, we aren't looking at simply what the author states in the paragraph, but instead looking more broadly as to why they included the entire paragraph? Am I understanding that correctly?

#feedback

I wish there were more causal You Try for this type of strengthen question!

@ said:

how did you break into the 150s? My highest test score was a 148 and for some reason I just cant even get a 150 on the dot.

I'd say if you're stuck in the 140s, really focus on the fundamentals. REALLY get a good grasp on conditional reasoning, and in the beginning, focus on the 'easier' question types like main conclusion just to help yourself do better on those sections before going further into the different question types.

@ thank you!! Yeah, you're definitely right, it is a major improvement from my diagnostic score and I should be proud of that. Maybe I'll take it again in the fall and just focus on my weak areas and hopefully I won't be as stressed out.

@ said:

You should be proud of your progress! Even if it isn't where you want to be, it is far better than where you were. Personally, I took the LSAT again in January and didn't get the score i wanted, but it was still 13 points higher than my diagnostic. Even though though I will likely apply to law school again after studying for the LSAT and improving my score, it's all about perspective. You've come along way and you got this.

I'm a little confused, I was debating between E but my thought process was "how do we know that these citizens were successful in helping authorities detect tornados?" Just because they helped out, does that mean that they successfully detected more tornados? Maybe I'm overthinking it.

I am also having this problem, I’m not sure why.

Can someone explain the Game of Thrones question, or question 12? I tried diagramming, and I'm confused on how to diagram if a sufficient claim counts for two necessary ones, as the question states.

The way I diagrammed it was /A → /R but I notice that there are two necessary claims if /R, those being killing B and J, so how would we diagram that, would it be /A → /R → B&J?

For Question 3, could you infer that if the [the myths] survived, then they contained truths that people wanted subsequent generations to remember?

My Lawgic went like this:

S (if the myths survived) → WD (they were written down)

WD → CT (contained truths...)

Therefore, S → WD → CT

Thus, S→CT?

@ said:

Score fluctuations are normal - remember that LSAC creates score bands (you'll always vary within ~3 points). For this specific PT, it's possible you had an off day, took a difficult PT that hit more of your weak areas, were out of practice, etc. But it's unlikely you've lost skills in the past month. Often with the LSAT, when you learn something new or improve, it can take a little while for your scores to catch up, so try not to put too much weight on one test result.

I'd recommend sticking with your study plan for January and continuing to take and review PTs (emphasis on review). Pay attention to the trends in your scores - if you're averaging 160+ by January, you'll be in a good spot to take the test then. It's still 1.5 months away, and you've made it to 158 already. Whether you push it to February depends on your application deadlines, but a lot of schools either don't accept February scores or have deadlines before then. Have you considered waiting till the next cycle?

Yeah those potential explanations could have been the reason why I didn't do as well this time around. I also think it could be because of time reasons, and feeling more pressure because I am currently reviewing my sections (without looking at the correct answer or my BR answer) and I am getting most of them right, so I think I need to work on timing a bit more to feel more comfortable. But thank you for the advice, I am definitely feeling more encouraged and motivated.

@ said:

no. you already knew your initial answer was incorrect and most of the time's there's two clear potential answer choices.

Well, no, I did not review my answer choices at all when I reviewed after (this is after Blind Review). So when I reviewed my wrong answers, I was not looking at the answer that I submitted or my BR answer, I am simply trying the questions again and seeing if I felt more pressure due to time constraints, and I am getting them consistently right this time around.

/