@MorganLSAT 💀

I am definitely one of the people who innately finds RC easy, I'm conflicted on whether to skip this material and focus on LR instead. Eh whatever I'll just skim through and look at the timing tactics a bit.

4/5 (I rushed and half-guessed the last 1 coz I had to pee)

I struggled the most with this question type compared to any other, so I am going to do a quick write-up of things that helped me adapt and find the right answer consistently. Very uncharacteristic of my usual aura-farming self, I know.

Remember, everyone has different proclivities for their intuition, my particular strengths and style makes it lucrative for me to spend a little more time on this question type compared to others because it's the one I was most inaccurate on. You might not need be as rigorous with your processes, and that's fine.

Here is a list of step-by-step instructions on how I tackled this question type to achieve relative consistency for those like myself that don't mind sacrificing an extra minute or two of time, hopefully the tips prove at least semi-useful:

First: Start by reading the stem and confirming it's an SA question, then read the stimulus. Highlight the conclusion in whatever color you find appropriate.

Second: DO NOT READ THE ANSWER CHOICES YET, instead highlight the premises in a different color to the conclusion, while ignoring/disregarding the context. Afterwards, turn the stimulus into a formal logic chain. Without any mental gymnastics or overt assumptions involved, the missing link between the premises and conclusion should emerge naturally.

NOTE: I kept a pencil and paper with me to keep track of the chains easily and efficiently(PAPER AND PENCIL HELPED IMMENSELY! I CANNOT RECCOMMEND THEM ENOUGH FOR THESE QUESTIONS).

Third: Ensure that you know the exact premise and/or contrapositive that directly connects the premises to the conclusion.

Fourth: Scan the answer choices for that EXACT premise, the wording and context might make it a little tricky to find, but it will HAVE to be there in some form. The nature of these questions is not about determining the likelihood of the conclusion following the premises, but the validity. That essentially turns them into an exercise of pure formal logic.

The more you practice this, the easier it becomes over time. If my process seems difficult, review some of the grammar lessons to help with synthesizing the stimulus better, or the formal logic lessons to help with creating chains.

This method helped me create a winning formula for these questions, and based on my timing for the other question types so far, it is absolutely worth sacrificing an extra minute or two for myself.

5/5

@VChristian 5/5 TOO LFG

5/5

Me and my cat celebrating in my room after I get a difficulty 5 question right(I used POE and was highly skeptical of the answer that was left but YOLO)

I understand it now

@ryumi Harvard here we come

@ManusWeber got me way too confident for this test LMFAO

'twas nobly fought

Turn me up I ain't even realize ts was a 4 star

30 seconds over time

@cworth1512 It's not about making inferences, but rather distinguishing what conclusions are formed by the stimulus. The passage specifies there are only two possible methods for MEMBERS to get the coupon. Pat doesn't fit either of the stated criteria for his coupon retrieval, which disqualifies himself from membership.

How I be feelin when I get these max difficulty questions right without blind review on time

@BDLSAT What helped me is getting used to the phrasing and grammar and then using the highlighting tool to separate sufficient and necessary conditions in the passage. For group 3 indicators I highlight them in orange since they are both stated as necessary conditions but can be negated to become sufficient ones.

Timing is improving

All three correct