- Joined
- May 2026
- Subscription
- Core
im trying my best
Admissions profile
Discussions
i identified the conclusion and found an ac that mirrors its logic so i pretty much skimmed
i was going to pick A because it seemed so straightforward and too good to be true ugh i need to not do this
A is correct because put simply, the passage talked about anarchy to then shifting to social philosophy. I thought we initially liked anarchy so why the hell did we end on social philosophy?
i got this question right based on how it mirrored the flow of the argument. E was just a shortened form of our passage.
Every other answer seemed to miss the steps in between fusion and splitting or bring about some unnecessary idea.
I predicted my answer as if the standards committee had their awards meeting, then the awards committee would then have theirs shortly after based on time.
But seeing the explanation and what others have said, these scenarios seem both occur separately which means either or exists :/
For this question, I sped read every AC's conclusions and all of them were the opposite of what was need ("it is probably not"). Then, I was left with A & D.
But then I noticed the passage itself talked about Countries-->Monarchs consistently even towards the end. Whereas AC A went from Novels-->Movies but then Movies-->Novels.
So D was my final answer considering it correctly/directionally mirrored the passage.
reminder that sa/na questions require an ac to include some 'new concept/word/idea' from the passage. In this case, the passage's 'new idea' is "notion of purpose." Thus, C has that. I've also noticed this pattern and alot of tutors have mentioned this too; I just couldn't believe it :/
why have us hone in on a specific word in a specific passage when the answer's referential information is a whole paragraph back lmao
i would suggest perhaps reaching out to your alma mater and asking if its acceptable to reach out to profs even after some time. Or perhaps talking to your ideal law school’s submission specialist if LORs in this kind of scenario are fine too.
I had maintained a great relationship with some of my professors and they’ve said its fine to reach out to them even later for a LOR. Or even sending an email now to your profs just slightly inquiring if they remember you; you won’t know if you don’t ask. But even with your extensive work history, I’m sure those LORs are great to have in your application!
I hope this helped and goodluck again 💪
Hello! I’m sorry if this is unrelated, but do you happen to have any tips to reach the 160s? perhaps what your process is in automatically finding an ac for every question type?
i too am planning on taking the test by october so seeing someone who already has my ideal score is motivation for me.
Either way, your drive is admirable! keep it up im sure youll hit 170s in no time
Hello all,
I recently completed my entire foundations over the span of 3 months with a consistent streak of 68 days. However, as I've just entered the drilling phase of my curriculum, I expected to at least increase in 10 points yet my analytics show otherwise. The Sage AI proposes that I just drill Causr and Phenom considering that these are my 2 main leaks, yet it feels as though I am spreading myself thin.
What I mean by this is why is it that when I drill in these areas, I get half wrong and half right (EX: 5/12, 7/12 BR). And in PTs, I score a 139, BR 152, when my goal is just a 162. I've thought about drilling each question type until in which I know the mechanical process down to a T before moving onto another question type I need to improve in. For example, I'm consistent in solving MC question types so I figured I could apply this approach to other question types. Moreover, even if I just consistently do my practice blocks, I still feel as though I am just doing a task instead of actually internalizing a mechanical process.
Does anyone have any tips or is feeling the same way? I'm just a bit ambivalent here as to what I should do. It would also be nice to talk to a tutor but this curriculum alone is all I can afford at the moment.
Thankyou
terrible passage and terrible questions. i dont feel as bad as i did now seeing how many agree that this passage is so ugly.
i hope that everyone reading this feels a bit better in what they got and i hope that everyone who went through with this is successful now :,)
when you tell yourself not to make outside assumptions about a question but then the lsat decides to use generic descriptions in an answer causing you to think "wth is a 'subset of activities'? thats not sports" and then you get it wrong for not choosing said assuming ac.
i hate that when i predict the answer, i second guess myself. and then when im confident in my ac, i get it wrong.
i hate you lsat the way you use big words to dissuade me from choosing an answer. how the hell was i supposed to know that "spurious" meant "fake" in regards to jamborees being ironic? i know why the quotation marks were used but "spurious," really??
ive accepted i hardly ever get mbt question types correct so this is a definite skip for me :/
reminder to use the search function if youre unsure as to what subjects were referred to and not just the first noun you remember from the passage :/
i figured that A was correct considering that if you were to strengthen the idea against our “recreation center is a necessity” argument, you would have to assume that the people accessing to it are able TO do so.
But if they aren’t, then following through with closing it down isn’t so bad if said center is not being utilized.
Every other answer seemed to talk about something unaffiliated