Oh wow it even has pre-determined 50% or 100% for accommodations. I feel dumb now. Thank you Julie for the response and very nice of the J.Y and the site makers to consider people with disabilities!

Thank you!

The principle is the philosophy of determinism, all actions are a product of an agent's environment mixed with the agent's intrinsic pre-determined characteristics. Therefore, every action is predetermined to occur at a certain point of pre-determined environmental interaction.

However, blaming crimes on law-abiding citizens is non-sensical for if criminals are not responsible for their actions due to determinism, neither are the law-abiding citizens responsible for creating the environment of determinism since they are themselves subject to it.

Shoutout to my philosophy undergrad for getting this question correct in 30 seconds (even though I did pretty bad on the rest in the set).

@ said:

I got a message from a friend that was scoring in the high 170s. . . and this is what it said: My proctor fainted during the first section, hit the wall, laid on the floor trying to get back together. The other proctor decided to start the test. Few minutes into section 1, the first proctor starts throwing up while loudly expressing pain. He stops throwing up, talks to the other proctor at a normal volume for a whole minute. My language comprehension shattered to pieces. Walked out after section 2.... moral of the story, sometimes shit is against you. He went back the next test and got a 174 :) don't get discouraged

"Please ignore the person potentially having a fatal seizure on the ground next to you, the test must go on!" Seriously wtf were they thinking JFC!

@ said:

@ said:

All of these ideas are good. Personally, I review questions right after the PT while they are fresh in my mind, but I also don't have as many questions to review as I am at the end of my study period and scoring in the 170s now. There is nothing wrong with saving review for the next day to do it properly, but I would focus on questions you spent most time on right after the PT still.

For LR questions try to push out some useful inference you glossed over or a lesson to take away. For example, maybe you were thrown off by multiple flaws in the stimulus and focused on the wrong one that was not reflected in the ACs at all (hence selecting a trap answer). The more questions you can do this for, the better.

For LG definitely redo the games you did badly on. Personally, I don't redo a game right away though - I put it in my calendar giving me some time to forget the ACs while remembering the inferences.

Re: RC I would like to hear what some other people have to say. I find it very difficult to review RC, as a lot of the traps seem highly situational.

Hey thanks for the response. Definitely keeping 2 take aways from this in mind (tougher questions getting reviewed right after the PT, and looking for take aways in LR that may play useful later in my studies).

Goodluck on your LSAT btw !

My pleasure and thank you! Hopefully someone else can chime in RE: their RC review strategy, because I do not have a good one in place.

The way J.Y. pronounced Métis gave me a solid chuckle.

All of these ideas are good. Personally, I review questions right after the PT while they are fresh in my mind, but I also don't have as many questions to review as I am at the end of my study period and scoring in the 170s now. There is nothing wrong with saving review for the next day to do it properly, but I would focus on questions you spent most time on right after the PT still.

For LR questions try to push out some useful inference you glossed over or a lesson to take away. For example, maybe you were thrown off by multiple flaws in the stimulus and focused on the wrong one that was not reflected in the ACs at all (hence selecting a trap answer). The more questions you can do this for, the better.

For LG definitely redo the games you did badly on. Personally, I don't redo a game right away though - I put it in my calendar giving me some time to forget the ACs while remembering the inferences.

Re: RC I would like to hear what some other people have to say. I find it very difficult to review RC, as a lot of the traps seem highly situational.

I have never misidentified the conclusion over 50 lsats until this question. Any insight as to how we can correctly identify which is the main conclusion in this stimulus?

#help

Shout-out to the terrible MLS All-star game against Inter Milan for helping me understand how the best players can make one of the worst team spectacles imaginable.

@ said:

Congrats on scoring in the 170s :) I have been feeling frustrated myself lately with all the studying. This post came at the right time. Just got to keep going one step at a time.

I feel you, if you are writing in November too then at least the end is in sight! But yeah it's honestly been very difficult and most people don't really understand the pressure or the effort required. My friends all just think I have suddenly become really lame cuz I never want to hang out, hopefully it all pays off and we can relax and party for a week straight once it's all over! :smiley:

Thank you for all the responses guys, this has been very helpful for me and I am sure, many others.

I chose D, because Zachary explicitly stated that Michelangelo intended the paintings to look different from the way they look now. On my view, by stating that it was extremely common for painters to add their own details on top of fresco - S is directly denying the truth of one of Z's premises.

Still don't understand why this is incorrect

#help

Edit: Is D incorrect, because Michaelangelo's intention is part of the conclusion, rather than the premise? If "Michaelangelo intended his paintings to have only the original fresco" was a separate premise, would D be correct?

Who cares about flak or looking neurotic dude? Ask yourself is the chance of you being accepted higher than 0? I would guess that it is, other than time spent on personal essays and such what do you have to lose? Plus you aren't just submitting the same profile repeatedly.

I would go for it, the only thing is that you do have to manage your expectations and reconsider your options eventually. As long as you can bare the possibility of this particular avenue of accomplishing your goals not panning out, I would apply again.

Side-note, I am Canadian so I don't know that much about US schools but I find it hard to believe that any school that is not HYS will limit your ability to go into academia. FWIW, I went to a UK university consistently ranked in the top 5 worldwide and I came across several distinguished researchers (including law) who came from US schools that aren't HYS (albeit ones that are still in the top 20).

I feel like I did not understand the stimulus entirely, because this question was too obvious to me. Thats not a humblebrag, I genuinely feel like I am missing something. Why is B attractive at all, it makes no sense to me?

#help

Damn this is the second time I got this type of question wrong. Once again, I just didn't see an assumption being implicit, it seems to me to be clearly stated instead. I did select A initially, but then chose D even though D felt weak since Rahima only reaches a conculsion of uncertainty about the truth of S's conclusion. But to me that did seem like a different conclusion. To me something other than is the same as instead of, can someone explain how the assumption of no overlap is implicit?

#help

I agree C is not a MBT. I feel like C is not correct, it is simply less wrong than all the other ACs. At least for C that assumption is linguistic, whereas for the other ACs the assumption must be made using outside information.

You have to read the law as: "the law of the land, it's THE law. Anyway, terrible question, however, you should be able to get this right based on how bad the other ACs are.

@ said:

@ said:

I have been doing at least one reading comp passage each day especially harder ones. There is a r/LSAT reddit post that lists harder RC sections I think, just search for hardest lsat sections. I still have timing issues with RC and LG but now I finish all my LR sections with 30secs - 2mins remaining. What helped me was having an anticipation for every question and once I find an answer which fits it, I move on (and flag if I want to). I used to waste a lot of time doubting myself and seriously considering every answer choice, and I used to end up guessing on the last 4-5 questions every time.

Thanks for the reply, I have been trying to do RC every couple days but a passage a day doesn't sound too bad!

@ said:

Honestly my advice is take 2-3 days off. I took 3 days off and focused on eating well and hitting the gym again. The most vital thing about RC is engaging with the passage and being actively interested in what you are reading. After my time off, I was refreshed and had my first -0 RC section.

It just feels so counterintuitive to take time off this close to the test but I think you might be right, thanks.

Yeah I can understand that, but it really isn't. If you feel bad purely taking time off read some peer-reviewing articles in the evenings, but don't test yourself on them. 2-3 days really isn't that long and exercise is extremely beneficial to cognitive function and burn-outs.

Thanks to everyone for replying, especially @ and @ Nikki, super helpful!

Write an optional essay if its a topic you can actually engage with. I wrote one for UofT on diversity, because I grew up as a mixed-race child in a deeply racist part of the world and ended up moving to Canada when I was 12 so I felt like I had a story to tell. I wouldn't write one just for the sake of writing one, but truth be told I believe everyone has valuable unique experiences and perspectives that they can tap into.

Nasty trick by LSAT writers. We are forced to make the assumption that Shakespeare is such a recognizable name that above all else there is nothing superfluous about the assumption that his plays were all written in English. What if it said Pushkin, would they expect us to not only know Pushkin wrote in Russian, but also that enough people know this for this assumption to qualify as obvious? English normative dogma. Where do we draw the line? Disappointing trick by the writers.

Damn I read ever capable as "ever-capable" as in capable in all circumstances and chose this as the answer choice for this reason. For A I took issue with the word "furnish", because it seems that Bettina isn't committed to saying that student evaluations cannot enhance the evaluative process as long as peer evaluation are the main basis.

Honestly my advice is take 2-3 days off. I took 3 days off and focused on eating well and hitting the gym again. The most vital thing about RC is engaging with the passage and being actively interested in what you are reading. After my time off, I was refreshed and had my first -0 RC section.

Anyone? I don't know if I am allowed to bump my own thread, but I feel like this is a worthy discussion. It's one of the most difficult parallel reasoning questions judging by the split in wrong-right AC choice %ages. I would encourage anyone who struggles with parallel reasoning to take a look at it so we can have a discussion about it.

Unfortunately there isn't too much you can do, but hope it opens up. Although I would try giving LSAC a call and complain that you already paid and due to inadequate supply of testing seats you are losing money and opportunity. I doubt LSAC can make a seat appear out of thin air, but doesn't hurt to try I suppose.

I would really appreciate a copy as well, but no worries if you are tired of being pestered