User Avatar
RishabhRaj
Joined
Aug 2025
Subscription
Core

Admissions profile

LSAT
165
CAS GPA
Not provided
1L START YEAR
Not provided

Discussions

PrepTests ·
PT155.S4.Q23
User Avatar
RishabhRaj
3 days ago

@nathantveloso0 Elderly Indian residents eating other curries is not off the table. The argument never commits to saying that the elderly Indian Singaporean residents only eat Indian curries and nothing else. I can't find anything in the stimulus, ACs, or JY's explanation that says this. The only thing assumed is that they eat Indian curries more often than non-Indian residents, on average (though not always. I'm sure there are some elderly Indian Singaporean residents who eat Japanese, Thai, etc curries more often than Indian curries and vice-versa with some non-Indians). But it seems pretty reasonable to say that someone would eat their own cuture's food more often (though not always) than someone of a different culture.

1
PrepTests ·
PT155.S4.Q23
User Avatar
RishabhRaj
3 days ago

@amsharma2002 I would disagree that it relies on that assumption. Nowhere in the arg or the AC or in JY's explanation do you ever have to assume that elderly Indian Singaporean residents only eat Indian curry, just that they do so more often than non-Indian elderly Singaporean residents. And idk, it seems pretty reasonable to say that a certain ethnicity on average (though not always) eats their own culture's food more often than people outside their ethnicity.

1
PrepTests ·
PTA.S3.Q18
User Avatar
RishabhRaj
Thursday, Mar 26

@nickpicado777169 To add to Nick's point, all the stim says about these other articles is that they relied on the survey. We don't know if they made the same claim that Raghnall did, that financial problems are the major cause of divorce. For all we know, they could've just cited this in a footnote talking about family problems or economic problems. So E is unsupported, while C doesn't run into these issue

1
PrepTests ·
PT105.S3.P4.Q23
User Avatar
RishabhRaj
Tuesday, Feb 24

@Gbalzer but the question stem says "each of the following aspects of Renaissance humanist education is mentioned except:" so pointing towards medieval monastic education is irrelevant, since that's an entirely different era. Can't be an aspect of Renaissance humanist education

2
PrepTests ·
PT106.S1.Q25
User Avatar
RishabhRaj
Friday, Feb 20

@dbasalone I think you're adding stuff to what M is saying. Nowhere in M's remarks does he say what you've put in parentheses ("the placebo certainly will not" have various effects). It's entirely possible that M thinks the placebo will have effects - he's just assuming that if there are effects, they're different than the ones from the drug. But you can't assume that one way or the other.

If M's remarks were written in the way you've put them here, then I could maybe see how C also works. But given that M's remarks aren't written that way, we can't modify the argument to make C also work.

We're trying to figure out how E is interpreting M's remarks as they are. From E's POV, M's remarks say nothing about whether the placebo does or doesn't have effects. So E can't definitively be thinking that "oh this M guy for sure thinks the placebo has no effects."

1
User Avatar
RishabhRaj
Friday, Feb 20

@HappyTestTaker Of course, I definitely support the idea of trying to enjoy whatever you're reading, whether it's RC or LR! Makes the test as a whole go down much smoother, it's really smart strategically. Do you notice any specific kinds of questions you tend to miss the most often in RC? And when you're reading, do you read faster than you usually do (whether for fun or on BR) and feel pressured by the clock? If your answer is yes to the 2nd question, my advice would, ironically, be to slow down. Simply put, slow is smooth, and smooth is fast. It'll aid your understanding greatly and avoid any misreading mistakes

1
User Avatar
RishabhRaj
Tuesday, Feb 17

Going to link you to a comment that I made on a similar discussion post (because I'm lazy lol) but hopefully it's relevant. But happy to give any advice if you want to share more details about your studying and specific obstacles. And yes believe in yourself! You got this!

https://7sage.com/discussion/56663/tired-of-studying

2
PrepTests ·
PT135.S2.Q13
User Avatar
RishabhRaj
Edited Tuesday, Feb 17

@lebronfan I think you're making a huge assumption thinking that the Jeff Bezos example is at all typical here... this isn't me endorsing the guy or anything but 1) it's possible we aren't talking about people of his ilk and 2) why do we have to assume that he lays off people after surviving an accident?

instead if you assumed that the people injured and saved are just average citizens, then net employment becomes incredibly relevant. The written explanation and JY's video explanation shows this pretty well. Say you have 100 people injured. Under this solution, 100 people are saved (which is obv great) and the author assumes that their increased earnings will contribute positively to the economy. But what if the people saved aren't contributing to the economy? They could be children, the elderly, unemployed, etc in which case they're not adding to the economy in the way the argument suggests. Or, the treatment from these serious injuries might not render them able to continue working. They could be in comas, face disabilities, etc. In that case, the author must assume that if people survive via trauma centers --> net increase in employment, ie people are good enough to return to their jobs and contribute to the economy. Otherwise, there's no connection between lives being saved and economic benefit

I sympathize with your frustrations about the questions. These are trickier than most questions traditional academia has had in store for us. But getting frustrated at the test saps away energy you could use towards crushing this question and other questions and getting your dream score. These questions are solvable and honestly do rely on reasonable assumptions being made. They want you to be frustrated and slip up on the test. Be better than them.

1
User Avatar
RishabhRaj
Tuesday, Feb 17

Really solid advice here in the non-negotiables and side tips!

4
User Avatar
RishabhRaj
Edited Tuesday, Feb 17

Haven't taken my final official attempt yet (so take everything here with a grain of salt) but I feel confident enough to say that I've broken through into the solid 170s after also being in the dreaded 160s plateau forever.

Firstly, it's absolutely worth it to hope for consistent 170 scores and there is a light at the end of the tunnel. It's worth it not only because it will help you get into better schools obviously, but lower-ranked schools that you get into will be willing to offer you better scholarships and make what is notoriously an expensive process much cheaper, especially if you use those offers to negotiate for scholarships. To that end, my first piece of advice would be to actually not place any attempt as being the "final attempt." It seems like you've taken it twice already, but you have a total of 5 attempts in 5 years (2 more beyond that for your lifetime maximum). Schools only care about your highest score. I see little upside to declaring June to be your final attempt, when you still have 2 more swings at bat to hit a home run, especially since if you're applying for this fall like me, you will have plenty of other test administrations in August, September, etc where you can still take the test and apply. Don't put pressure on yourself unnecessarily by prematurely declaring one attempt to be the final one when you don't need to.

As for the LSAT side of things, I don't know what your study routine is like but your profile shows a decent mix of drills and sections. You've done a healthy amount of questions but there would are a few things that might help the most that I implemented to finally notice a change:

  1. Are you wrong answer journaling? and how thoroughly are you doing this? When I was in my 160s plateau, I initially didn't wrong answer journal at all and just hoped I would finally break through on one of these attempts. And when I did start journaling, there was honestly a good bit of time where I was half-assing it. If I got it right on blind review, I was just like "eh, just gotta read better, nothing much else to it." That is the wrong way of going about things. If there's even a shred of doubt about any part of a question, even if you got it right or got it right on Blind Review, review each question thoroughly. Consult every source you can: the written explanations, the video explanations, the "Ask a tutor" button, even some of the comments on each question left by other students and tutors can be helpful. Leave no stone unturned. Each question you get wrong (and arguably even ones you were correct but unsure/guessed on) has 2 issues: you were tempted by the wrong answer(s) when you shouldn't have been, and you missed the right answer. These mistakes will repeat in one form or another on future questions so don't bank on the fact that you've gotten other questions like this right. Address the root of the problem thoroughly. This is a time-consuming process. I honestly have spent much longer reviewing questions than doing questions and that was what got me past a lot of mistakes that kept showing up over and over again. Note down the traps you fall for routinely. There's honestly a solid chance your mistakes are from not reading thoroughly enough and if so, mirror that process on the actual timed drills, sections, and tests you do. Slow is smooth, smooth is fast. Visualize concepts or give concrete example numbers if that helps make an abstract stimulus/situation more concrete. Develop your own strategies for crushing your weaknesses confidently.

  2. Work on questions consistently. It doesn't have to be everything every day, but just something everyday helps. Even if it's just an RC passage or just a handful of questions or review. The secret here is to try and make this as enjoyable as you can. Yes, some of these topics are arcane and mundane. Try and find something about it that interests you. The questions and review fly by a lot easier when this is something you enjoy rather than something you dread. You may still score questions right if you dread the test and do it kicking and screaming, but it goes so much smoother the more you come to enjoy the questions and view it as less of a challenge and more like something routine and fun, like a puzzle. The easier and more calmly you can crush the easy questions, the more time, focus, and energy you'll have for the genuinely tougher ones, and that'll leave you at the end of a section confident and ready to do more, rather than stressing out over whether you've guessed right on a bunch of questions.

I probably have more advice tailored to your situation if you wish to share more/DM. But hope this helps!

16
PrepTests ·
PT125.S1.P3.Q18
User Avatar
RishabhRaj
Sunday, Feb 8

@nehemieeloiseau304 I'd have to disagree respectfully. I think JY's explanation pretty clearly lays out that there is no support for C's statement of choreographing various interpretations while there is plenty of support for A's merely highlighting elements that were already present in the cakewalk

1
PrepTests ·
PT117.S3.Q17
User Avatar
RishabhRaj
Saturday, Jan 31

@sjbutton THANK YOU. this just made everything click in my head

1
PrepTests ·
PT146.S2.Q16
User Avatar
RishabhRaj
Saturday, Jan 31

Really loved the written explanation on this. just focusing on the precise conclusion (as opposed to the broader ones that B and E get you to go for) makes this so much easier. Caveman summaries are great for every stim, highly recommend

2
PrepTests ·
PT124.S1.Q8
User Avatar
RishabhRaj
Thursday, Jan 29

@jett crazy that this is question #8 in the section. I thought I was losing my mind seeing this hard of a question early on, I thought I was about to bomb the section struggling with something this early on and assuming that things would be tougher after this

and then it turns out, this is one of the hardest LSAT questions ever. lol

1
PrepTests ·
PT131.S2.Q15
User Avatar
RishabhRaj
Monday, Jan 26

the example in Kevin's video explanation to explain how A works is hilarious, I'm stealing that 😂

1
PrepTests ·
PT159.S2.P3.Q20
User Avatar
RishabhRaj
Wednesday, Jan 7

I was between A and D and I guess the reasoning for A goes that if you can test a change to a theory (the 2nd theory’s alteration to the theory of gravity), you can also test the original theory itself (Einstein's)? 

D is just more unsupported. The 2nd theory only suggests that Einstein’s theory is wrong about gravity across distances, but we haven’t tested this out or have any evidence, so we can’t claim anything about the best available evidence (if it doesn’t exist) or whether the theory is in fact wrong.

2
PrepTests ·
PT159.S2.P1.Q2
User Avatar
RishabhRaj
Edited Thursday, Jan 8

@HannaWallace I think I'd refer to what some of the other tutors above have said. The comic strip was written from 1937-38, so you can at least justify the 1930s part. And it's not unreasonable to assume that the musicians featured were featured in the not too distant past from this point, which would include the 1920s. Since this is isn't explicitly stated, just strongly implied, I'd say this is enough room. You aren't making some totally unreasonable jumps, like saying it was about musicians in the 1800s or 1950s or something.

Moreover, you have to compare this AC (imcomplete and imperfect as it is) to whatever else you chose. I'd really doubt that you could make fewer or more reasonable jumps to defend the other answers.

2
PrepTests ·
PT121.S3.P1.Q1
User Avatar
RishabhRaj
Tuesday, Jan 6

@abramyansemail505 I'd disagree that either of those words show hesitation. Saying that the paintings were meant to do symbolize/do something doesn't indicate the author's attitude. That's just a description. You could agree or disagree with that description, but it doesn't show hesitation.

In some different contexts, "probably" might indicate hesitation but I don't think it does here. If the author was hesitant about accepting this hypothesis, they might've introduced doubts or a competing explanation with just as much, if not more evidence behind it. I think "probably" here serves more as being safely within doubt, saying that we don't know 100% for sure, but that among the options out there, this is the best one available.

1
User Avatar
RishabhRaj
Tuesday, Dec 23, 2025

@businessgoose that's good to hear, I'm probably giving my memory too much credit lol 2 months is a long time 😅 quick question about the older PTs - are there explanations for some of the questions? written or video? I don't want to look through all the questions without having done them first to figure out whether there are explanations

1
PrepTests ·
PT149.S2.P3.Q19
User Avatar
RishabhRaj
Tuesday, Dec 23, 2025

Here's a way of reading AC A that I think is consistent with the passage and might help clear up some confusion I've seen some others have. I also interpreted A to say that the social norms somehow provide a direct, analogous enforcement mechanism like copyright has if someone steals your joke, ie the norms make the stealing comedian pay the owner of the joke back for whatever the joke is worth. But that's not how A has to be interpreted. It's saying the norms allow you to recoup the costs of developing a routine, and it doesn't specify that you recoup it by taking away from the stealing comedian. Here's a story that might help illustrate this:

  • You develop X joke, it gets stolen by comedian Bob

  • This AC is saying that the costs you had in developing X joke can be recouped bc of social norms. How? 

    • It is not that Bob somehow is forced to pay you for whatever the joke was worth because the norms have some enforcement mechanism

    • Instead the norms harm Bob. He’s shamed, ppl don’t work with him, bad rep, etc. His career tanks.

    • But after, you get to go on creating other jokes in the future and profit from them. The norms prevent anyone from being a dumbass like Bob and stealing from you. So you lost some costs when you made joke X and Bob stole it to make some money, but the social norms let you recoup those costs because you can make jokes Y, Z, etc in the future without those being stolen. The development costs are recouped, just not from Bob directly

Hopefully the analogy makes sense, but if it doesn't please let me know

6
User Avatar
RishabhRaj
Tuesday, Dec 23, 2025

@LSATstudyer totally fair, I think there are a handful of questions where I specifically remember the right AC or at least some trap answers, but there are quite a few where I've seen the stim/passage but don't remember the question or answers. The LSAT does have its favorite topics to recycle lol appreciate the insight!

1
User Avatar
RishabhRaj
Tuesday, Dec 23, 2025

@gavinlitchford89 Thank you for the insight! Aside from blind review and obv looking at the question explanations, I haven't intentionally re-done any questions I've done before, including the ones I've gotten wrong. But I think I want to try this and see how it goes for the older questions I don't quite remember.

1
User Avatar

Sunday, Dec 21, 2025

RishabhRaj

🙃 Confused

Running out of PTs/sections

Hey y'all, I've been studying with 7Sage for a while and was wondering if anyone's run into a problem with running out of material to use and how you've gone about practicing in that context. I'm not sure if my analytics are publicly visible but if anyone's able to check, it might clear up the problem I'm facing.

From a combination of doing full length PTs as well as timed sections, I've now used up 23 full practice tests out of the 59 ones available. But of the ones remaining, I've used quite a decent chunk of them for drills, so none of them are 100% fresh. The freshest I've found are around 80% fresh, but most are only 50-70% fresh, with a few sub-50%.

Given this, I've kind of hit a cross-roads with what PTs and even timed sections I can do. I worry that if I take any of these remaining tests as full PTs or even just as individual timed sections, there's a good chance I will have already seen and done numerous questions on the test, and therefore my scores won't actually be reflective of my true performance on an actual PT.

I see 3 options, each with their own pros and cons.

  1. I bite the bullet and just use these tests as full PTs or sections, regardless of how fresh they are. While there are going to be questions I've seen and therefore I might have a slightly inflated score as to how I'm doing, at least the questions will be representative of the modern LSAT and I'm sure there's still great value in doing the questions I haven't seen in the setting of a timed PT specifically.

  2. There are a set of older bonus PTs (PTs 7-18, A, 21, 23, and F97?) that the PrepTest pool settings have specifically disabled that I could use. On the one hand, there's obviously no problem of having seen these questions before because I haven't even touched them. But the reason these tests are disabled is because 7Sage says they're not necessarily representative of the modern LSAT. 1 huge gap is that there aren't any comparative passages on RC and lord knows I could practice those. I might also be wrong about this, but I don't think there are explanations for these questions, which might make review tougher.

  3. I ignore PTs and sections entirely. There are still plenty of modern LSAT questions in the settings I have that I haven't touched, and I can still drill these by making Frankenstein LR or RC sections if needed. Of course, these drills won't be structured like the way an actual section of a PT would be, where difficulty starts low generally and ramps up. These sections would have random difficulty interspersed throughout. This would also only be for individual sections, since I don't think the drilling tool lets you construct a whole PT's worth of questions. The individual questions would be fine to use, but I worry that I'd be losing practice in the context of the specific PT in the lead up to my January test.

Also not sure how important this is, but I did take PT 159 when it was first released by LSAC. No experimental, no explanations, but for all intents and purposes, I have done most of that test, even if it not necessarily on 7Sage.

Any insights on how to handle this? I'm probably overthinking things and maybe there isn't a huge difference among these options. There could also be some hybrid or totally out of the box options I haven't considered. Interested to know anyone's thoughts!

3
PrepTests ·
PT149.S3.Q24
User Avatar
RishabhRaj
Friday, Dec 12, 2025

@nathanbrowny2 it's not a super strong strengthener but here's a rough example I kind of came up with during the test that might help:

This is a scenario that could be consistent with the hypothesis in the stim (actual number hasn't gone up, we're just reporting more).

1950s - 20 small, 10 medium, 10 large tornadoes. 40 total.

Today - 20 small, 10 medium, 10 large tornadoes. 40 total.

The total number of tornadoes is 40 both times. Let's say in the 50s we were really bad at detecting tornadoes and could only detect medium and large ones, so we report 20 tornadoes (10 + 10). We can't even detect the small ones, so that's 0.

Acc to the hypothesis in the stim, our technology improves since the 50s and we can detect more tornadoes now. Today, we catch all 20 small tornadoes, but also the medium and large ones from before. We're now at 40 total tornadoes.

On first blush, it looks like the amount of tornadoes has gone up by 2x. But it's only the reported tornadoes that have gone up. The actual amount has been 40 tornadoes in both eras all along.

C comes and basically strengthens these randomly chosen numbers I've picked out by confirming that these are the numbers based in reality. The number of medium and large tornadoes has stayed the same (20). The difference in reported tornadoes has been in our detection of the small tornadoes that have been there all along.

5
PrepTests ·
PT145.S1.P4.Q21
User Avatar
RishabhRaj
Friday, Dec 12, 2025

@CathyYao I'm not a bio major or anything so I don't know the particulars, but I think in general, transcription is pretty close to copying. If you were to "transcribe" an interview, you'd be copying down what the speakers said in the interview into words on a page. That's more or less what seems to be happening here. The DNA is copied over to RNA, but it was a slight typo/error in it, which is the mutation that helps the immune system

2

Confirm action

Are you sure?