- Joined
- Dec 2025
- Subscription
- Live
Admissions profile
Discussions
@7sagecb225 I think this is well said. Don't lose sight of the end goal: being able to quickly and accurately understand complex sentences. The exact grammar answer can be debated but you still understood what the author (of that sentence) was trying to convey to you. That's perfect
This is a perfect example of why it's important to follow the relationships of a passage. The LSAT will throw weird or confusing topics at you (Dense science passage, philosophical jargon, or topics way out of familiarity with) that might make you feel lost in the details. Paying attention to the claims helps you not get lost and focus on what matters (what's the conclusion being argued? Why is it that likely to be true?).
Keep in mind the LSAT tests you based on the passage, your knowledge of the topic isn't graded, what matters is what can be supported based on the information provided; you can't assume anything. Therefore, it's actually nice to have a question based on a random topic. Your less likely to assume information about a topic you're clueless about.
@guppygrr That's the level I'm hoping to reach! So far my experience has been smashing my head against a wall and not being sure how to get over it. So far so good with this course though!
Best of luck with your studying!
It's crazy (frustrating a little) how easy the Spanish 101 question is after reading the prior cookie cutter questions. The correct choice is practically calling out to me. Is it weird to say this mental puzzle is kinda fun to work out?
It's interesting how conservative the LSAT is with making assumptions; you can't make any. I made an assumption about B student attendance based on information on C student attendance (Answer B). I also got tripped on the word "Most", I assumed its definition was the general meaning (sizable majority, ~80%), not the literal definition (more than 50). Really good intro question, it highlighted several common errors for me in one problem. I'll be more careful next time!
I see a lot of comments complaining about the complexity and the fact that there is no video. Don't give up! What helped me was identifying the conditional premise (the first sentence sets up the rules of the game, that's how I think through it), then seeing the author state we don't have the necessary condition (plaintiff makes a showing that X characteristic of Y class is an immutable trait), and thus it is not possible for us to have the sufficient condition as well (membership in suspect class).
I hope this helps, I may have messed up with the language of the premises so take that with a grain of salt. Keep at it guys and don't give up!!
If you can, study partners or even someone to talk to along this journey helps a ton.