- Joined
- Jul 2026
- Subscription
- Free
Admissions profile
Applications
Discussions
Oh man, the sigh of relief I breathed when I got my score this morning.
Diagnostic: 168
Average PT: 173
Max PT: 177
Official Score: 180
I don't really have any advice other than: LOCK IN! Study a lot! Stare at the LR cheat sheet until it's burned into your synapses! Eventually the patterns will reveal themselves. I really didn't expect to see a 180 today and I am, of course, over the moon about it. I'm not sure I can provide anything that the lovely tutors on here haven't already said, but I'm happy to answer questions about my personal journey!
Good luck to everyone testing in October! You've got this! Never give up!
Straight up blatantly requires outside reasoning, which we are EXPLICITLY told not to do at the beginning of the test. Worst question I've ever seen.
I think this question requires a little bit too much outside reasoning. For all I know, smaller tornadoes could be just as easy to detect as medium or large ones. Not an impossible question but a slightly unfair one in my opinion.
So, so dumb. I really hope they learned not to put questions like this on real tests. The connotations of these words are WAY too subjective for an exam whose questions always and only have exactly one correct answer.
I take issue with the elimination of E. I think it requires you to make too big of an assumption outside the text of the question, i.e. that the 40s and 50s were long enough ago that reuses of plots that were overused in that time wouldn't bother modern audiences.
@canami200 I got this question right in BR by thinking about what happens to the argument if you take away the assumption from C vs the one from B. If you reject B's assumption, it could still be the most relevant indicator without being the sole indicator, so the argument is weakened but still stands. However, denying the assumption made in C causes the argument to fall apart completely, because the comparison itself is the key factor in the conclusion.
I still don't think this is a great question, and I did get it wrong on my first try, but C is definitely a slightly stronger answer. This is an outlier in terms of difficulty.
@ranfeng this is an understandable mistake to make as someone who doesn't live in the US, but in the US "African American" generally refers to all Black Americans, not just immigrants from Africa. It's a complex issue but the AC isn't "segregating" by using this language any more than the language itself in common use "segregates" Black Americans.
This feels like it requires outside reasoning to get correct, which we're specifically told not to do. In order to arrive at AC A, I have to make the assumption that creating a positive social effect means Invisible Man must have been directed towards making that effect and that it was culturally relevant in a way that would have pleased the critics (i.e. by focusing less on the concerns of the individual).
This is an insanely difficult fluke question, I hope there's nothing like this on the actual LSAT!
One of the hardest questions I've seen yet. The wording is so far removed from what is typical for formal-logic questions that I was thrown off and made unsure of my logic instincts! So close to getting it, too.
@MayaVM It's about the disruption of the "expected musical course," not the sound itself, so you are bringing in outside reasoning here. It's a pretty tricky word-sense problem, but if you look closely it's pretty clear that A is wrong.
Got this wrong because it felt too obvious. The key here (for me) was taking the time to identify the difference between a "supports which one" and a "supports the strongest" question. If I had gone into this with the correct mindset that only one answer would be supported whatsoever, I think I would have gotten it correct; instead, I took a looser approach by assuming that all of the answers would have some element of validity, which made E look too simple to be correct.
@jessverpez it kinda does; I got this one right and I thought of it as diverting the reader from the difficulties or tensions raised by the text. For example, according to the "familiar attitude," a "literary" detective novel would force the reader to confront the complicated social dynamics surrounding the policing of crime whereas a "lowbrow" one might divert them from this by focusing entirely on the exciting, fun, but ultimately shallow tropes of genre fiction.
that's the one :) that page saved me many times!